MPHIL IN ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY - TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
RACISM AND IMMIGRATION IN IRELAND: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Marshall Tracy
Preface by John A. Jackson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology, University of Dublin, Trinity College
Dublin, 2000
PREFACE
This is a most timely analysis of the complexities of Irish policy in relation to immigration. The long history of emigration out of Ireland has tended to take attention away from the steady and constant pattern of settlement by foreigners on Irish soil – a pattern as old as Ireland itself. Nationalism and the development of the independent state with its emphasis on Ireland for the Irish created a myth of a pure Irish people unsullied by foreign blow-ins, dropins and conquerors. Consequently the country has been ill prepared for the growth in numbers of refugees and asylum seekers who have come to Ireland in recent years. The state has also been deficient in its preparation of appropriate legislation and regulations to deal adequately with the complex of issues involved with immigration. Part of the problem has been lack of information and Marshall Tracy shows the weakness of the statistical data available and the failure to use it to put the present ‘refugee’ crisis in proportion. In answer to his own rhetorical question, he finds Irish immigration policy to be discriminatory and having strong strands of racism. Its roots lie in legislation produced in Britain at the end of the last century in face of the influx of European Jews, and it has not been much modified since then. Although his survey of legislation is very adequate, the strength of this text for me lies in the very elegant WHISC model of the quintessential Irish stereotype. Sean Citizen turns out to be WHITE, HETEROSEXUAL, IRISH-BORN, SETTLED and CATHOLIC. These characteristics amount to the core values of the sense of belonging rightly to Ireland and Irishness. His WHISC is modelled on the extremely useful defining stereotype for the USA of the WASP (WHITE, ANGLO-SAXON, PROTESTANT) which helped to distinguish the dominant ethnic group from divergent immigrant and, indeed, native groups. Such prototypical designations, even though they represent extreme characteristics, serve as valuable tools for analysis. They also raise important questions regarding the components of the dominant hegemonic culture to which the immigrant is exposed as the ‘other’ failing in significant ways to conform to the prescribed type. This is a very important analysis triggered in part by Marshall’s own experience as an immigrant to the land of his roots which elegantly and calmly sets out both the contradictions and the confusions in recent developments of policy. The xenophobia and potential for racism that he exposes should cause concern and may illustrate another component in the hollow shell of complacency that has sheltered modern Irish society from some of its harsher realities. John A. Jackson Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology University of Dublin, Trinity College
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 2 CHAPTER 1 METHODOLOGY AND DEFFINITIONS ...................................................................................................3 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 3 DEFINITIONS............................................................................................................................................. 7 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER 2 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND RACISM ...................................................................................................9 A TOPOLOGY OF IMMIGRATION POLICY ....................................................................................... 9 IMMIGRATION: THE OPEN DOOR / CLOSED DOOR DEBATE ................................................... 10 IMMIGRATION AND RACISM: A NORMATIVE MODEL .............................................................. 11 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 14 CHAPTER 3 AN IRISH NATIONAL IDENITY: THE WHISC ..................................................................................... 15 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 15 THE WASP AND THE WHISC ............................................................................................................... 16 WHITE: THE RACIALISATION OF IRISHNESS ............................................................................... 17 HETEROSEXUAL: GENDERED IDENTITIES ................................................................................... 18 IRISH: THE NECESSITY FOR DE-ANGLICIZING IRELAND ........................................................ 19 SETTLED: LAND OWNERSHIP AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS .............................................................. 20 CATHOLIC: THE CHURCH ................................................................................................................. 21 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 22 CHAPTER 4 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND IMMIGRATIONS 1935 TO 1996 ......................................................... 23 INTRODUCTION: THE BIRTH OF IRISH IMMIGRATION POLICY ............................................ 23 1935 TO 1956: IRRITANTS TO THE BODY POILITIC ...................................................................... 24 1956 TO 1990: THE ROLE OF THE UN ................................................................................................ 26 1990 TO 1996: THE EU TRIAD OF CONTROL .................................................................................... 31 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 36 CHAPTER 5 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND THE DISCOURSES OF IMMIGRATION ......................................... 37 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 37 THE DISCOURSE OF IMMIGRATION, REFUGE AND ASYLUM .................................................. 37 THE STATISTICAL DISCOURSE ......................................................................................................... 42 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 47 CHAPTER 6 NORMATIVE MODEL RE-EXAMINED ................................................................................................... 48 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 48 DISCRETIONARY POWERS AND REFUGEE / ASYLUM POLICY................................................ 49 VISA POLICIES, NATURALISATION AND UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRATION ...................... 49 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 51 POST SCRIPT ................................................................................................................................................ 52 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 54
2
INTRODUCTION I knew things had changed in Ireland when I arrived in
come from. Is this racist? I think by most standards it
September to begin my course of study. The
is.
immigration officer asked to see some verification that
The fundamental question is how do you tell
I was attending an Irish University. I explained that
if a policy is racist. In discussing this with Professor
this paper work was in my checked bags. After a ten
John Jackson he jokingly commented, ‘that’s simple
minute conversation at 5 am with fatigue getting the
they all are. Immigration policies exist to include and
better of me, I told the immigration officer, ‘It doesn’t really make any difference. With an American passport I can enter this country and stay for up to 90 days.’His response was a curt, ‘not if I say you can’t’. Eventually my passport was stamped allowing me to
exclude’. He later qualified this by stating that a racist policy might be one in which there was an inherent sense of superiority constructed by the society in the policy. I spent two months thinking about this trying
enter the country for two weeks by the end of which I had to register with the Gardai as an alien. For the past year I have lived as alien number 106020. If I had not been to Ireland before, I would have thought that this was the natural way immigration control works.
to reconcile racism and immigration policy. I finally came to the conclusion that although immigration policy is exclusionary and does have the propensity to be racist, it does not necessarily have to be so. I took
However, I had studied in Ireland in 1995, and never
the time to examine different immigration policies in
had a problem.
Perhaps more importantly I was
order to learn where Irish policy was located and out of
singled out, since mine was the only blue passport in a
this has come a set of sub-policies which I will
sea of ox blood. I was the only non-EU national on the
examine to determine if there is racism in immigration
flight.
policy. This scene is probably played out several
I thought that this would be a straightforward
times each day at ports of entry in Ireland. However,
task, and that this work, like many others which
this time it was different: this time I was in question.
examine immigration, would rely heavily on statistical
As my studies progressed I began to give more thought
information. This was not to be the case, since Ireland
to the topic of immigration and racism. I admit that my
lacks statistics which are readily available in many
interest in this topic is partially driven by personal
other countries. I have attempted to compile my own
experience. Imagine this scene played out again with a
statistics,
different protagonist. If I were a black person from a
Department of Justice. However, I have not received a
third world country who did not speak English, instead
response to my written requests. The result is that this
of a seemingly white American (my mother is
work has become an odyssey. It has taken me down
Hispanic), perhaps things would have been different.
roads I never thought of in the attempt to answer what
Perhaps I would have been kept in a detention area
seemed at first to be a very simple research question.
until the next flight back to whichever country I had
Could Irish immigration policy be considered racist?
by
requesting
information
from
the
3
CHAPTER 1 METHODOLOGY AND DEFFINITIONS INTRODUCTION I shall begin by discussing the methodology used in this study: case-orientated cross-national comparative analysis. Then I shall examine the key concepts and terminology in order to understand what exactly is meant by each of the terms commonly used in this comparative study. These terms are immigrant, immigration policy, and racism.
The comparativist approach has many advantages. There is a conscious decision on the part of comparativists to use macro-social units. This has a twofold effect. Primarily, it allows the researcher, to ‘treat nations as components of large international systems’ (Øyen, 1990: 6). In effect is makes the states units that act and are acted upon by outside forces. As
METHODOLOGY
a result nations are not static. The researcher is able to
For most sociologists ‘the very nature of sociological
locate endogenous and exogenous causes (Øyen,
research is comparative, and thinking in comparative
1990:6).
terms is inherent in sociology’ (Øyen, 1990: 3-4).
comparative illustration (Smelser, 1976) approach uses
Sociologists tend to locate phenomena in relation to
cross-national comparison to locate social processes in
other societies or between majority and minority
the country of study. Moreover, the comparisons are
groups in a single society. Actually, no social
used to illustrate the location of a particular system so
phenomenon can be isolated and studied without
that it may be viewed historically and contextually in
comparing it to other social phenomena. Sociologists
its entirety (Ragin, 1987: 50-52).
The
case-orientated,
or
systematic
engage actively in the process of comparative work
In this case Ireland is compared with several
whenever concepts are chosen, operationalised, or
other Western countries. I will primarily compare
fitted into theoretical structures (Øyen, 1990: 4)
Ireland to the UK, Germany, and France, but I will also
As this particular work revolves around
make references to the USA, Canada, Australia, New
questions of racism and immigration I have chosen to
Zealand, Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, and Japan. I
adopt a case-orientated cross-national comparative
will employ a cross-national methodology with the
method (see Rangin, 1987) to illuminate the position
caveat that comparisons to other nations illuminate
and possibilities in Irish policy. The case-orientated
Irish policy rather than explicate processes in the other
approach is a recent addition to the comparative
states of comparison as suggested by the case-
method. As Øyen states:
orientated approach.
One of the gains of the matrix is the addition of the single-country study the assumed uninteresting case for cross-national research – and the demonstration of its usefulness when the emphasis is on explanatory statements based on characteristics of the country… (1990: 6)
Comparative studies are problematic for several reasons, namely that ‘[A]ll the eternal and unsolved problems inherent in sociological research are unfolded when engaging in cross-national studies’ (Øyen,1990: 1). Furthermore there are problems of comparability of statistical data, definitions of research
4
parameters, and equivalence of concepts (Hantrias and
Epistemologically this is the major problem
Manger, 1996: 5). I shall address each of these in turn.
not only in cross-national studies but also in quantitative research. Often researchers do not
COMPARABILITY OF STATISCAL DATA The
problem
magnification
of of
statistical
comparability
quantitative
problematise the statistics being used or the method of is
a
methodological
collection. There are also institutional and conceptual issues.
problems:
At an institutional level ‘the secondary
Quantitative analysis has mainly been used by social scientists. Its strength lies in the ability to aggregate information on a large number of different units for macrostudies. Its weakness arises from the fact that many research objectives can only be managed in a limited way at best. These limitations principally derive from the failure to locate information with in its context and form correlation’s which remain unexplained if they cannot be linked to an empirical basis and interpreted in a qualitative way. (Bendikat, 1996:131)
analyst wishing to work on another country’s data may have difficulty in getting hold of documentation’ (Glover, 1996: 31). Conceptually, there is a problem for non-national researchers, Glover contends, this is ‘…mainly because of the difficulty for the nonnational researcher of grasping the set of circumstances and ideologies within which the data were produced ‘ (Glover, 1996: 32). I would argue that being a nonnational is a strength as it allows me to ‘make everything strange’ in a very real way and may add insights that a national takes for granted. These
conceptual,
institutional,
and
The problems of quantitative method in cross-
epistemological concerns are further magnified by the
national studies arise from the nature of the statistics
choice between harmonised and non-harmonised data
being compared. This work will employ secondary
sets. Harmonised data sets are produced by Eurostat
statistical analysis. There is a methodological issue of
and are a good basis for comparative study.
comparative
harmonised
and
non-harmonised
statistics. There are technical, institutional, and epistemological considerations in secondary statistical analysis. Closer scrutiny suggests, however, that statistical products are dependent on the history, culture, and administrative structures specific to each country and are far from being identical, despite the costly efforts made by statisticians to harmonise methods, questionnaires and nomenclatures. (Desosieres, 1996: 17) Thus, the question asked, and the resulting variables are likely to be related to specific, historically located, conceptions of what is politically feasible and acceptable. (Glover, 1996:30)
The
problem with these statistics is that ‘[t]he detail of national classification is invisible’ (Glover, 1996: 34). As a result, the institutional and conceptual problems are no longer at issue. What is at issue are epistemological concerns, or the inability to locate them. Using non-harmonised statistics there is a different set of problems: In some cases, national records may be non-existent or may not go back very far. For some topics, information may have been routinely collected in tailormade surveys in a number of the participating countries, where as in others information may be more limited because the topic has attracted less attention among policy-makers (Hantrias and Magen, 1996: 8)
5
There may also be a problem of the nonexistence of statistics. The solution to this problem is
If both qualitative and quantitative methods are problematic what is the answer methodologically?
to use harmonised and non-harmonised data sets
In this case the solution is a mixed approach.
whenever possible and compile data from them to give
‘The
a richer picture of processes of migrations. Secondly,
fragmented, but it combines the advantages and
we turn to qualitative methodology, because ‘national
disadvantages of both methodological approaches
data
particular
while restricting the number of research units’
epistemological context’ (Glover, 1996:36), to address
(Bendikat, 1996: 131). In effect, one cancels many of
epistemological, conceptual, and institutional concerns.
the methodological problems of the other. A mixed
sets
are
produced
within
In contrast to quantitative empirical macro-studies, qualitative research often produces unexpected results. It offers the advantage of correlating theoretical assumptions and empirical material in a tighter way than can be done when using standardised statistical methods… In order to make a valid inference, however, this approach has to be more open to methodological challenges than it has been in the past. (Bendikat, 1996: 131)
mixed
method
uses
approach
is
qualitative
more
pluralistic
sources
to
and
address
epistemological issues in quantitative secondary data analysis, while the
quantitative
method
allows
generalisations from the qualitative method to be used comparatively at the macro-level.
DEFINITION OF THE RESEARCH PARAMETERS AND EQUIVALENCE OF CONCEPTS The most common way to address problems of
One such challenge is the ability to generalise at an international level findings made at the national or local levels. Furthermore, due to translation the underlying cultural context may be lost (Ungerson, 1996: 64-65). The alternative is to resort to
Common sources for documentary analysis newspapers,
to create topologies and normative models. However, topologies and normative models, whether they be descriptive or evaluative, tend to be static and reductionist (Hantrias and Magen, 1996: 9-10). Since
documentary sources.
include
research parameters and the equivalence of concepts is
minutes
of
proceeding
of
there are no existing topologies or models for my area of research I have had to create my own.
government bodies (Bendikat, 1996: 135), speeches,
If we accept the argument that: ‘the great
and press releases. These, however, are not without
advantage of cross-national comparisons is that, at
their associated drawbacks. Newspaper research,
their best, they force researchers to look at a total
although a rich source, is very time consuming.
context and enable them to discover the greatest
Debates
number
of
Government
proceedings
can
be
of
factors
that
are
interactive
and
illuminating. However, ‘with the current upsurge of
interdependent’ (Hantrias and Magen, 1996: 3), then
modern mass media and the popularisation of the
the topology I have created for immigration policy
argument style, discussions have become more vague
meets this criteria.
and phrasal’ (Bendikat, 1996: 135). Press releases and
components but also outside factors such as NGOs and
speeches are often more personalised, but, like
regional/supra-national organisations. However, one
petitions they can be ‘highly tendentious or one-sided’
must keep in mind that:
(Bendikat, 1996: 135).
It includes not only national
6
Then there are the inter-related criticisms
Normative analysis in comparative social policy serves two main purposes. The first is descriptive; it is used to identify similarities and differences between countries or systems… The second purpose is evaluative, normative analysis is used to say which policies are relatively good, and which are relatively bad by some criterion. (Spicker, 1996: 66)
that the specificity of countries are not taken into account (Spicker, 71), and the categories are static while policy-making is dynamic. My model takes into account inter-dependencies of policy considerations realising that the ‘inter-relationship between issues are crucial to understanding a system’ (Spicker: 73). In this way it is not static. Moreover, by constructing the model using subsystems, there is a clear understanding
Moreover, ‘The main purpose of describing systems is to classify the constituent parts in terms
of the specificities of the country and, as such, the policy.
which facilitate subsequent analysis’ (Spicker, 1996: 67). By adopting normative models or topologies in order to reconcile methodological concerns of crossnational studies in relation to concepts and parameters, we
take
on
the
associated
advantages
disadvantages of normative models. Often
and
descriptive
and evaluative processes are at odds. In relation to this Spicker (1996) outlines several problems which cover both evaluative and descriptive processes. I shall deal with each of these in turn and include the solutions.
A further criticism of normative models is they are often too elaborate (Spicker, 71-72). They are often composites in which one part applies while another part of the model may not. Conveniently, as regards immigration policy, the absence of policy or a subset of policy is policy. More succinctly, non-policy is a policy in its own right (see Hammar, 1985 and Cornelius, et. al., 1994). Another
definition for the purpose of being adequately descriptive (Spicker, 1996: 71) and too broad for the purpose of evaluation (ibid.: 72). Models generally refer to overall systems. When the focus shifts to subsystems, the normative classifications are much less
creating a model out of the individual sub-systems involved in immigration policy. This also allows for easier operation of the main units of analysis. Furthermore, I have been as specific as possible in my reductionist,
by
including temporal and numerical references in the model.
‘normative
72) This type of policy is not linked to the approach to policy, and , as such, the model becomes less dynamic in terms of description and evaluation. In attempting to describe and evaluate racism in immigration policy, the type of policy is directly linked to the approach to policy as constructed in my normative model. Finally,
helpful (Spicker, 1996: 72). I have addressed this by
becoming
that
differences in the approach to policy’ (Spicker, 1996:
Normative models are considered too vague in
without
is
distinctions are not necessarily identified with clear
NORMATIVE MODELS
definitions,
problem
‘[E]ven
within
ideological
classifications, there are often further shades of opinion’ (Spicker, 71). My topic is especially sensitive to this.
Racism is a hotly contested and debatable
subject. I have chosen to use Robert Miles’ definition of institutional racism, as I feel it best suits the topic and methodology. However, the use of a normative model almost dictates the use of a more universalist definition of racisms.
7
DEFINITIONS
(b) guarantees of ‘permanent status’; legal security versus vulnerability to arbitrary expulsion. Immigrant policy comprises: (a) indirect: immigrants’ inclusion in the general allocation of benefits; ‘equal’ versus ‘discriminatory’ distribution (b) direct: special measures on behalf of immigrants; ‘affirmative action’ and the removal of legal discrimination. (Hammar, 1985: 9-10)
Immigrant: Defining
an
immigrant
would
seem
relatively
straightforward. However, in the academic sense there are several hairs to be split which directly affect who is considered an immigrant and who is not.
The
definition in this paper will follow closely what Tomas Hammar (1985) has suggested is a workable definition. An ‘‘immigrant’ is a person who migrates to a country and then actually resides there longer than a short period of time, i.e. for more than three months’ (Hammar, 1985: 11).
Immigration policy, according to Hammar, are the controls the state implements regarding entry once one has entered the availability or possibility of naturalisation of some kind whereas immigrant policy
This definition encompasses a wide range of groups and sub-groups, including: refugees and asylum-seekers; ‘guestworkers’ or others working in a country for an extended period of time regardless of legal status; holders of residence visas; and others who have overstayed tourist or work visas for whatever reason. This definition excludes people who enter a state to visit friends or relatives for a short period of time; tourists who leave the country within the
refers to the policies adopted towards immigrants in relation to the civic sphere, voting rights, and the social sphere, i.e. access to government health care and other social
services.
Or
perhaps
more
concisely
‘immigration regulation is the control that a sovereign state exercises over the entry of foreign citizens and their access to residence and employment’ (Hammar, 1985: 249).
expiration of their visa; and others who reside in a
In this paper I intend to examine immigration
country for a short amount of time, i.e. performers in a
policy and not immigrant policy. I will not be
show or people on business trips.
addressing issues concerning citizenship rights, access to social services, or equal treatment in a societal
Immigration policy:
context. Instead I will focus on the actual policies
Turning my attention to immigration policy, I intend
which allow people to enter and reside in a state up to
to make a very important distinction that directly
and including naturalisation.
affects this study. There is a difference between immigration
policy
and
immigrant
policy.
Racism:
Immigration policy as I use it in this paper is what
Racism as a concept has drawn much academic
Hammar would refer to as ‘immigration regulation and
attention over several decades.
aliens control’.
theories of racism (Rex, 1983; Malik, 1996; Gilroy,
There are several
1987; Miles, 1989) . To enter into an extended debate Immigration policy comprises: (a) ‘strict’ or ‘liberal’ control of the admission and residence of foreign citizens
of this issue in this paper, although it engages the concept, is beyond my scope. The definition of racism
8
I have adopted is Robert Miles’s definition of institutional racism: The concept of institutional racism therefore refers to circumstances where racism is embodied in exclusionary practices or in a formally nonracialised discourse. But in both cases it is necessary to demonstrate the determinate influence of racism. (Miles, 1989: 87)
beneficial presence, as populations possessing characteristics which are likely to make a positive contribution to the nation. (Miles, 1993: 139) SUMMARY I have adopted a case-orientated cross-national comparative approach as it allows me to locate and illuminate Irish immigration policy and its relation to a large global system. Furthermore, I am able to
Since exclusion is the sole purpose of immigration policy, one needs to ask whether
contextually and historically explain and describe Irish policy making the analysis richer by giving a fuller
immigration policy is inherently racist. If we view
understanding of the process concerned. The adoption
immigration policy on an individualistic basis, which
of a topology and normative model furthers this
in theory if not in practice it is, then the answer is, no,
understanding while the mixed method allows me to
immigration policy is not inherently racist. However,
use qualitative and qualitative sources to describe and
when a policy ceases to be individualistic and begins to
explain Irish policy in relation to racism.
systematically exclude groups, then a policy is racist. Similarly ‘formally non-racialised discourses’ are inherent to immigration, since all migrations, large and small, have a racialised discourse surrounding them.
Does this mean that immigration policy is
inherently racist? The short answer is no. As Miles later wrote: (However), not all migrant populations have been racialised in an exclusively negative manner. Racialised discourses can attribute negative and/or give positive attributes. Potentially, migrant populations can be racialised in such a way that they are evaluated as a
Although immigration policy is not inherently racist, the propensity exists for institutional racism in immigration policy. Miles’s argument allows me to take a more universalist approach to racisms without the constraints of a black/white dichotomy or without reifying ‘race’ as a concept.
Moreover, Miles has
tested his theory in relation to migration, and, as such, it is a perfect fit for the topic at hand.
9
CHAPTER 2 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND RACISM A TOPOLOGY OF IMMIGRATION POLICY
specialty visas, statistics, and the ability to control
In order to examine immigration policy I first had to
undocumented immigration. Immigration laws include
decide what it encompassed. I argue that a number of
all laws that pertain directly to immigration, separate
interrelated areas need to be taken into account.
from naturalisation law, which may be codified in the
Immigration policy is produced by three separate
constitution and/or a separate law. Tourist, work and
spheres of influence (see Fig. 2.1), state policies and
specialty visas are a separate category as they relate to
laws, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), and
other areas of state influence. Many times visas are
supranational/ regional agreements and laws. I will
tied to other legislation and must be dealt with
explain each of these in turn.
separately. It may seem odd that statistics are classified as part of a government’s immigration policy.
Figure 2.1. A Topology of Immigration Policy
However, I argue that statistics are a major factor in the creation of government policy.
How these
statistics are created and presented to the public and government officials directly affects government
Government Policies
policy, and, as such, the creation of statistics must be
N G O s
included in a review of immigration policy. Supranational and regional agreements or
Immigration Laws: Discretion Naturalization Tourist visa Work Visa Statistics Refugee / Asylum Policy Ability to control undocumented immigration
laws affect state policy. These are agreements which are made with a regional power such as the EU, on a global scale the UN, possibly on a bi or multilateral basis. For example, although it is not mandatory, all signatories to the 1951 UN convention are expected to
Supranational/Regional agreements
grant refuge or asylum to those to whom it applies (see Goodwin-Gill, et. al., 1985). As a result many countries have developed internal policies which deal
Supranational agreements: Signatory to UN Conventions Regional Agreements Bilateral Multilateral
directly with refuge and asylum. Regional agreements, such as freedom of movement in the EU, affect government policies on many levels, mainly residence
Government policies include areas of state control in relation to immigration.
These are:
immigration laws, acts of a parliament or other law making body, naturalisation law, tourist, work,
and work. Multilateral or by-lateral agreements would include the common travel area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland (Jackson, 1963), or the agreements between Germany/ Poland and Germany/ Hungary which restrict refugees from entering
10
Germany from these countries in exchange for financial assistance (Weiner, 1999: 23).
The real world consists of Sovereign states which are political communities and these political
NGOs also form part of immigration policy as
communities have boundaries. This would not be the
their presence or absence can affect state policy. More
case if there were a global state where boundaries
fundamentally NGOs reside in the private sphere. If a
would be non-existent or if there were no states at all
well organized NGO structure is in place in a state, it
(Walzer, 1983: 34). Since this is not the case,
may have enough influence to intervene in specific
communities have the right to exclude or include
immigration cases. Furthermore, NGOs often act as
whomever they choose.
lobbying bodies to secure reforms in immigration law. Many NGOs cross national boundaries and lobby at the national and supranational levels. The absence of an active, well organised group of NGOs, does not allow for this process to occur and in their absence there is, in effect, no check on immigration policies. IMMIGRATION:
THE OPEN DOOR / CLOSED
…states are simply free to take in strangers (or not) - much as they feel free, leaving aside the claims of the needy, to share their wealth with foreign friends…and to enter into collective security arrangements with foreign states… Admission and exclusion are at the core of communal independence. They suggest the deepest meaning of self determination. (Walzer, 1983: 61-62) In Walzer’s communitarian argument the state
DOOR DEBATE
functions like a ‘club’ free to choose whom it includes The debate over ‘open’ or ‘closed’ immigration policy, or what is also referred to as ‘admissionist’ vs.
or excludes. A caveat to this are ‘the claims of the needy’, i.e. stateless persons or refugees, toward which
‘restrictionist’ policies (Cornelius, et. al., 1994) has
the state acts like a ‘family’. This is based on the idea
raged for millennia. This debate is part of a larger
of mutual aid, ‘the good Samaritan’, which also guides
debate on citizenship stemming from the classical
states in the liberal tradition. However, this does not
philosophers, Aristotle and Socrates, and in the liberal
mean open borders for refugees and asylum-seekers.
tradition, Locke and Hobbes.
As Walzer argues;
It is in the liberal
tradition that the most helpful debate is located. Primarily, because the country under study and the countries of comparison are democracies in the liberal tradition. I have chosen two theorists to examine. Joseph Carens (1987) argues for an open admission policy, while Michael Walzer (1983) argues that a state, or community, has the right to restrict immigration and ‘choose’ who will be included or excluded. However, there are also arguments for closed-door policies made by Rawlsian and Nozikean theories. I have chosen Walzer as he incorporates elements of Rawlsian and Nozikean theories.
We seem bound to grant asylum for two reasons: because its denial would require us to use force against helpless and desperate people, and because the numbers likely to be involved, except in unusual cases, are small and the people easily absorbed… but the right to restrain the flow remains a feature of communal self-determination. The principle of mutual aid can only modify and not transform admissions policies rooted in a particular community’s understanding of itself. (1983: 51) Hence, although the principle of mutual aid is morally binding, a state is able to choose who it will and will not include, as there are limits to a ‘community’s collective liability’ (Walzer, 1983: 51). At its most
11
basic level, Walzer’s argument is: ‘…we who are
the extent necessary to preserve public order’ (Carens,
already members do the choosing, in accordance with
1987: 259). The logical conclusion for Carens is ‘[A]
our own understanding of what membership means in
need for some restrictions would not justify any level
our community and what sort of community we want
of restrictions what so ever’ (1987:259). He argues
to have’ (Walzer, 1983 : 32).
that the only threat to public order would be from door
citizens, not from immigrants. Because the ideal of
immigration policies not only against Walzer's
public order assumes all citizens act in a just manner,
communitarian argument, but those of Rawlsian, and
there is no threat to public order (Carens, 1987: 259).
Joseph
Carens
Nozikean theorists.
argues
for
open
Carens argues ‘…there is little
Arguments based on communal rights such as
justification for restricting immigration’ (1987: 252)
Walzer are also unacceptable to Carens. ‘Us’ vs ‘them’
no matter which argument is given. At the broadest
arguments based on ‘our’ common culture are lacking
level this is based on ‘…our [Liberalism’s] deep
in so far as ‘…we cannot dismiss the aliens on the
commitment to respect all human beings as free and
ground that they are other, because we are products of
equal moral persons’ (1987: 251). More specifically,
liberal culture’ (Carens, 1987: 269). As such, self-
Carens argues there is no basis for exclusion based on
determination has produced societies which, in the
arguments of public order (Rawlsian), individual
liberal tradition, hold the ‘equal moral worth of
property rights (Nozikean), or communitarian rights of
individuals’ as a fundamental principle. Moreover,
self determination (Walzer).
clubs are private organisations while states are public.
Arguments for restricting immigration based
The liberal tradition guarantees equal treatment in the
on private property rights are fundamentally flawed,
public sphere. ‘So, the fact that private clubs may
since the state has the right to restrict individual
admit or exclude whomever they choose says nothing
property owners.
To do otherwise, i.e. restrict the
about the appropriate admission standards for states.
national property, threatens individual property rights
When the state acts it must treat individuals equally’
(Carens, 1987: 252):
(Carens, 1987: 268).
[p]rohibiting people from entering a territory because they did not happen to be born there or otherwise gain the credentials of citizenship is no part of any state’s legitimate mandate. The State has no right to restrict immigration. (Carens, 1987: 254)
The limited brief of this paper does not allow me to enter into an extended debate of Walzer’s theory and its criticisms. Rather, I outline his argument as one point on a spectrum. Similarly, I outline Carens’s argument to illustrate the other end of the spectrum. Moreover, I use this as a theoretical foundation for
Conversely, arguments based on public order state that ‘Liberty may be restricted for the sake of liberty’ (Carens, 1987: 259). All liberties stem from
constructing a normative model, since the restrictionist argument clearly leaves space for racism and the admissionist argument counters it.
public order. Immigrants are a threat to public order and as a consequence, to liberty. Thus, immigration should be restricted. Carens argues against this
IMMIGRATION AND RACISM: A NORMATIVE MODEL
position by addressing the fundamental position of
Immigration policies exist to include and exclude, or as
‘public order’. ‘Restrictions would be justified only to
Cyril Howard has stated in relation to a 1985 report by
12
the Commission for Racial Equality in Britain, ‘The
Remembering that racism, in Miles’s (1989) definition,
simple answer would be to say that discrimination was
is an either/or, or both classification, it allows us to
both inevitable and, ultimately, essential to any system
apply it to this liberal versus illiberal model.
of control’ (Howard, 1993: 116). While discrimination
A purely racist policy would have both
may be an integral, even essential, part of immigration
exclusionary practices and a formally non-racialised
policy, when does it cross the line and become racism?
discourse,
It could be argued that the mere fact that a policy is
immigrants. A restrictive policy would also have both,
discriminatory makes it racist. However, there is no set
but the discourse could be more xenophobic in nature.
of criteria to measure discrimination or racism in an
A moderate policy would be discriminatory with a
immigration policy. Is it possible to examine
positively racialised discourse. Similarly, a progressive
immigration policies in relation to racism?
policy would be characterised by a discriminatory
ascribing
negative
characteristics
to
can
practices without a racialised discourse. Finally, the
differentiate between policies, and it is possible to
liberal policy would not discriminate and lack a
stratify policies based on a set of criteria. This is not to
racialised discourse. As such, I argue, it is possible to
say that states fall neatly into a category. It is
substitute the word racist to the right and multi-ethnic
The
simple
Figure 2.2.
Open door or Liberal
Multi-Ethnic
answer
is
yes,
one
Immigration Policies and Racism
Progressive
Pluralist
Moderate
Restrictive
Discriminatory the
left
Xenophobic of
the
spectrum
Closed door or Illiberal
Racist
inevitable, no matter how well a normative model is
to
(See
fig.
2.2).
constructed, that some states or indeed most states will
Discriminatory could be substituted for moderate, a
fall between the line displaying characteristics of one
restrictive policy could be xenophobic, and progressive
category with many attributes of another.
could be pluralist.
In a normative model of discrimination /
The policy areas examined in relation to
racism in immigration policy it is possible to create
racism include tourist, work, and specialty visas,
many different gradations. The simplest way to
discretion in the implementation of the immigration
classify immigration policies is to use five categories.
policy, the naturalisation process, and the state’s
The extreme right would be a Closed door or Illiberal
undocumented immigration policy. These are outlined
policy based on an extreme version of Walzer’s
in figure 2.3.
argument, followed by a restrictive policy, a moderate
The liberal state is a utopian vision. It does
policy, a progressive policy, and finally a liberal or
not exist, since all states exercise some type of
open door policy on the extreme left, based in Carens’s
discrimination based on one of the policies. Likewise,
argument of liberalism. How does this relate to racism?
few if any progressive states exist. Moderate states
13
would include elements of the Canadian and Swedish
Brubaker, 1992). Jus sanguinis is citizenship by blood
systems which are very multicultural. The majority of
or descent while jus soli is a civic birth right. Jus
Western or industrialised countries could be regarded
domecili takes into account the length of residency as
as restrictive as they discriminate on the basis of
an alternative method of naturalisation while jus soli is
several different criteria. Closed door would relate to
a civic form of citizenship in the French tradition
Saudi Arabia, as it has a highly developed guest work
(Brubaker, 1992).
system and grants few if any tourist visas.
Another key policy is the state’s position on
It may appear odd that tourist visas are a
undocumented migration (see Miller, 1999). That is to
source of discrimination. However, examining the
say that a state’s ability to control, or perhaps more
tourist visa policy of a state reveals that particular
importantly
nationalities are systemically favoured while others are
undocumented migration and how it deals with
excluded. For example in most Western countries, in
undocumented immigrants, is an indicator of its
Europe and North America, tourists are allowed to
attitudes towards immigrants in general. Moreover, the
enter a state for up to 90 days without a visa. This
levels of undocumented migration are directly linked
would be an example of a moderate policy since it
to other policies such as tourist and work visa policies
excludes other third world countries which are not
and can, in fact, cause the numbers of undocumented
given the same opportunity. When discussing work
immigrants to become inflated.
its
willingness
to
actively
stop
visas (see Martin, 1999) it is necessary to make a
Finally, we must discuss the amount of
distinction between work and specialty visas, although
discretion granted to officials (see Pratt, 1999). This is
in some cases they may perform the same task, namely
difficult to do as discretionary powers are often not
filling short-term gaps in a labour market. Work visas
codified.
are much less part of a system of recruiting highly
Specialty visas most often discriminate on the basis of
When law ends, discretion begins, and the exercise of discretion may mean either beneficence or tyranny, either justice or injustice, either reasonableness or unreasonableness (Anizman, 1975, cited in Pratt, 1999: 201) However, it is important to note the aspects of
education as they aim to recruit the highly skilled (see
discretionary power that are codified. An example of
skilled workers and much more aimed at providing a labour force, however skilled. A guest worker system does allow permanent settlement as the ultimate objective and is in effect purchasing human capital.
Freeman, 1999). However, there is also a more basic purpose for specialty visas i.e. granting preferential treatment to one nation or class of people over another. An example of this would be the J1 and Morrison visas
codified discretionary power would be the ability of an immigration officer to refuse entry to the state at a port of entry. Refugee and asylum policy also form part of immigration policy (see Suhrket and Zolberg, 1999).
granted to Irish nationals by the US. The policy of jus sanguine in Germany and its
There is a clear difference between refugees and
policy towards ‘ethnic Germans’ is well documented.
asylum-seekers, since refugees have been granted 1951
Naturalisation,
three
Geneva Convention status and asylum-seekers are
categories; jus soli, jus sanguinis, and jus domecili (see
applicants for that status. However, as both categories
or
citizenship,
falls
into
14
A
relate to the international sphere of influence, I shall
normative the
model
is
helpful
theoretical
debate
as
it
deal with them together. Often a state’s larger
operationalises
over
immigration policy is reflected in the microcosm of
immigration. In using subsystems of immigration
refugee/asylum policy since this is where all spheres of
policy i.e. visas, naturalisation, refugee/asylum policy,
influence interact closely.
and undocumented immigration as units of analysis we are able to operationalise the topology and normative
SUMMARY By creating a topology of immigration policy we are able to identify its constituent parts. Furthermore, we are able to expose the inter-dependencies between national and supra-national spheres as well as public (state and supra-state) and private (NGOs) spheres. Thus, the interdependencies allow us to construct a normative model.
model,
thus
making
both
more
descriptive,
explanatory, and dynamic. Before examining Irish immigration policies, we must locate Irishness theoretically, since it may be a ‘determinate influence of racism’ which is a key factor in Miles’s definition. Moreover, identity is an important element in the Walzer/Carens debate. The next chapter will focus on Irish identity – the WHISC.
15
CHAPTER 3 AN IRISH NATIONAL IDENITY: THE WHISC INTRODUCTION I take a very wide interpretation of culture. I see it as the life pattern of a community. This pattern incorporates customs, language, and behaviour. It’s a certain attitude towards life. It changes constantly. But when there is an official culture a debate occurs about what constitutes tradition. This is common in countries which were controlled by another state for a long time…What was meant by ‘Irishness’ were certain identifiable traits which were perceived as traditional. These traits could be singled out as the marks of ‘Irishness’. (Gearoid O Tuathaigh in ‘Treo?’, episode one)
For a country, or a culture, to presume homogeneity is a fallacy. In Ireland’s case this is doubly true. How can people, a territory, which has been historically invaded by Vikings, Celts, Saxons, Normans, Danes, and Anglos imagine themselves to be homogeneous? In Ireland, as in other countries, the process of nation building fostered the construction of a national ideal. The national ideal was further reinforced by different institutions in society.
The
Church was perhaps the most influential and powerful of all the institutions. As will be argued later, the Irish Catholic Church did not reside only in the religious or
My Father’s family is the stereotype of Irish-
moral spheres of Irish society, but it had a role in every
America. My grandfather was a corrupt, heavy
sphere,
drinking cop in Boston. My eldest uncle is a Priest,
codification of the national ideal in the 1937
my other uncle a retired navy pilot, and my father a
Constitution allowed the State and Judiciary to enforce
school teacher. Behind them all was my grandmother,
the ideal.
an overbearing mother who pushed all her sons into certain careers to increase family prestige. How much more Irish-American can you get? Or perhaps, how much more Irish can you get? Change the word cop to Garda and the location from Boston to any place name in Ireland, and one could easily be describing a family in Ireland. Include ties to the GAA and one could say that this was a stereotypical Irish family. Why is this
social,
economic,
and
political.
The
If it is clearly not possible to locate a singular Irish identity, what is the point in attempting? I argue that what people imagine themselves to be is sometimes as important as what they really are. That is to say, even though ‘Irishness’ is clearly not onedimensional, white, settled, catholic, nationalist, etc., what a nation tells itself it is affects how it views itself and others. Moreover, it is not my intent here to locate
so?
a singular ‘Irish’ identity but the ‘Irishness’ which is Ireland has long had an ‘official culture’. It is, in some part, written in the history, the literature, and the Constitution. Thus, we now see a constant debate in Irish society about what is or is not traditional.
This ‘official’ culture was constructed
before, during, and after emancipation and continues to
the national ideal. It is also not my intent to demonstrate the construction of the national ideal although it is a by-product of this chapter. The Irish national ideal can be summed up in five words: White, Heterosexual, Irish, Settled, Catholic (the WHISC). I
The ‘official’ culture was
argue that these are the identifiable traits of ‘Irishness’
based on a construction of Ireland as a homogeneous
which were mentioned in the opening quote. It is the
permeate Irish society.
society.
16
intent of this chapter to examine each of these traits
do not fit into the WASP ideal as they are not Anglo-
and explain why they are the national ideal.
Saxon, nor Protestant, and for a long period of time were racialised, simianized, by the English.
THE WASP AND THE WHISC
It is important to locate this ‘prototypical
I think there was always this official insistence on the idea that, you know, you kind of had to tick off on your list of qualities, you know; Catholicism - yes, nationalism - yes, GAA - yes, Irish language - yes, you know, that the more of these boxes you ticked the more Irish you were. (John Waters in ‘Treo?’, 1999, episode one)
Irishness’, the WHISC, since it has become an invisible centre in debates relating to immigration, Europeanization, refugees/asylum-seekers, and Irish Travellers.
I believe that just as the WASP ideal
functioned as not only an acronym but also an ideology for colonialism and imperialism, so too does the WHISC in the Irish context of multiethnic issues.
The construction of a ‘prototypical’ cultural
Examining the work of Michéal MacGreil
identity in Ireland was not unlike constructions of the
(1996) is useful in locating in-groups and out-groups in
prototypical American or English identity which took
Irish society. Using the Bogardus social distance scale,
the
Anglo-Saxon
MacGreil has studied Irish attitudes towards the
Protestant). In the Irish context this construction was
‘other’. This data demonstrates what is socially
exclusionary and relied on a false creation of
preferable to the Irish in terms of ‘welcoming to
homogeneity. Just as the acronym WASP has come to
kinship’ and ‘denying citizenship’. I would argue that
engender certain connotations, I shall argue that the
these statistics are indicative of what the Irish tell
WHISC should do the same.
themselves they are through their attitudes towards the
form
of
the
WASP
(White
The WASP connotes more than just White
‘other’.
Anglo-Saxon Protestant, ‘[t]he WASP was the
The
Irish
see
themselves
as
white.
prototypical American’ (Schrag, 1972: 17). This is
Identifying most closely with the English and ‘white’
perhaps an over simplification. The WASP was more
Americans, and least with ‘Africans’, ‘Asians’, and
than just the prototypical American. The WASP has
‘Black’
come to represent not only a type of person but also an
Moreover, heterosexuality is demonstrated as the norm
ideology, an ethic, and indeed a culture.
In the
as seen in the ranking of ‘gay people’ 55th out of 59
American context there was a conflation between
categories examined (ibid). The rankings demonstrate
Americaness and WASPness (ibid.: 26). While the
a conflation of ‘Irishness’ with that of Catholic
dominant WASP culture which eclipsed all others
Irishness. Catholics were ranked 1st out of 59 while
WASPness was an invisible centre. ‘A WASP. From
Irish speakers were ranked 4th (ibid). The settled
cradle to grave, from literature to politics, from the
component of WHISC identity is best seen in the
meetings of Rotarians to the reflections of statesmen,
ranking of ‘Travellers’ as 54th out of the 59 categories,
the WASP idiom permeated so much of everything
one above ‘gay people’ and one below ‘alcoholics’
that we hardly noticed it’ (ibid: 14). The WASP was,
(ibid).
Americans
(MacGreil,
1996:
64-71).
and still is, a powerful way of understanding white
The role of the Church in the WHISC identity
hegemonic discourse in America. However, the Irish
is enormous. It may seem that I am overstating the
17
country.... But to see white chimpanzees is dreadful; if they were black, one would not feel it so much, but their skins, except where tanned by exposure, are as white as ours. (Quoted in Loomba, 1997: 161)
position of the Church, but it is an omnipotent and omnipresent part of the WHISC identity. It has been said that: The role of the Church is undeniable in Irish society. An Irish person was, and is, likely to be born in a Catholic hospital, educated at Catholic schools, married in a Catholic church, have children named by a priest, be counselled by Catholic marriage advisors if the marriage runs into trouble, be dried out in Catholic clinics for the treatment of alcoholism if he or she develops a drink problem, be operated on in Catholic hospitals, and be buried by Catholic rites. This ‘cradle to grave’ attention of European social welfare system was created in Ireland by the Church. (O’Toole, 1998:67) One could argue that the WHISC or WASP does not exist, but, the same can be said about ‘race’. Race is a social construct, not an objective reality, yet racism exists. (Banton 1979, Rex 1983). I argue that the WHISC is the same. It is not an objective reality but a social construct. However, due to its reification
It was this type of stereotyping
that justified the
British colonisation of the Irish. The Irish, however, were still visibly white, and this had the effect of giving the Irish an ambiguous role in British imperialism. The Irish were subordinate to the British as an ethnicity but privileged in relation to indigenous peoples around the world. Noel Ignatiev’s How the Irish became White (1995) deals with diasporic Irishness and the fact that Irish people have ‘made it’ economically and politically as an ethnic group in the USA yet remain outside the WASP establishment. However, the Irish have constructed themselves as Western and White. There is no mistaking ‘[t]hat Irishmen and Irishwomen of all religious persuasions have cumulatively devoted far more blood and sweat to
empire
building
than
to
empire
breaking’
(Comerford, 1988: 12).
one is forced to examine it.
The ‘whitening’ of the WHISC identity did
WHITE: THE RACIALISATION OF IRISHNESS ‘The Irish are the Niggers of Europe, lads.’ (Doyle in O’Toole, 1998: 19) The racialisation of Irishness was based on the
not take place through the Diaspora alone. It was also done in Ireland most notably by the Church. ‘This is illustrated by the collections for ‘Black Babies’ which were, until recently, a ubiquitous feature of Irish
same European trend that racialised the majority world
Church
during colonisation. As the rest of the world became
forthcoming: 25). Moreover, through Irish catholic
racialised in its use of racial discourse, so did Ireland.
missionaries there was a construction of Black people
Irish people found a specific place in the British
as helpless increasing the white identification of
colonial process. (McVeigh and Lentin, forthcoming: 22)
propaganda’
(McVeigh
and
Lentin,
‘Irishness’. As Goldstone recalls: ‘[t]hose images of Blacks in Irish missionary journals play up the
Historically the Irish were simianized by the English. An English scientist maintained that the Irish post-famine jaw structure was Negroid
(Loomba,
1997: 106). Charles Kingsley wrote after his first trip to Ireland: I am haunted by the human chimpanzees I saw along that hundred miles of horrible
superiority of the white priest and their Christian beliefs and also create dis-empowered images of black people always laughing and happy’ (1999: 42). The whitening of Irishness is perhaps best understood in relation to English expansionism:
18
English nationalism relied upon cultural distinctions with demarcated Europeans from blacks or even the English from the Italian or Irish people; conversely, these cultural distinctions rationalised an aggressive nationalism that fuelled England’s overseas expansion. (Loomba, 1997: 71) In the Irish context it was not colonial ‘overseas expansion’ but catholic missionary work which aided in demarcating the Irish from the blacks. It was this ‘cultural imperialism’ through the Catholic Church that allowed the Irish to use the same process, the racialisation of the ‘other’, which had been
used
on
themselves.
The process
of
‘racialisation’ is in effect a two way street. In the process of constructing the ‘other’ one is in fact constructing oneself at the same time. When the Irish were constructed by the English, the English, in turn, were constructing themselves. The same may be said for the Irish in their construction of the ‘black baby’.
distribution of contraceptives, and divorce lifted, and there has been some progress in changing the Constitutional role of women in Ireland (see Bryne and Leonard, 1997). The Irish Catholic Church participated in the gendering of the WHISC through its doctrines. The dis-enpowered Irish mothers’ only power was based in the domestic sphere. This power was sanctioned by the Church and the local priest and took the form of the mothers’ moral authority over children (Inglis, 1998: 199). The 1937 Constitution codified women as helpless individuals. As Coakley has suggested, the State viewed, and still views, women as ‘dependent mothers’ (1997: 185). The codification of gender roles in the Constitution ensured women would remain in their ‘place’ in society by limiting their actions maritally, reproductively and financially. The heavily Catholic Constitution constructed women as stay-athome mothers, daughters and wives, and the Catholic education system re-enforced this. ‘This was one of the reasons why, when the National School system was
HETEROSEXUAL:
set up, such a heavy emphasis was given to the training
GENDERD IDENTITIES
of girls to be good mothers’ (Inglis, 1998 :188). Thus
The construction of ethnicity, and, indeed the nation, is
gendered roles were evident in every sphere of life.
gendered (as argued in Yuval-Davis,1997). WHISC
This construction of Irish women as mothers was in
identity was gendered through its codification in the
direct contrast to the masculine ideal of men as bread
Constitution of the Irish State, the Catholic dominated
winners.
educational system, and by the Catholic Church itself
Nandy (1983) argues that in a colonial /
Identity was
postcolonial setting, the feminisation of the colonised
sexualised by the nationalist debate, women were
and masculinisation of the coloniser results in
constructed as mothers and men as breadwinners.
colonised males constructing and implementing strict
(Morgan and Lynch, 1996: 529-561).
The construction of the state and gender roles
gender roles in postcolonial society.
Ireland is an
is obvious in the Irish context. The Constitution
example of this process. Men were constructed as the
outlawed homosexuality, as well as abortion, sale and
breadwinners while married women were notionally
distribution of contraceptives, divorce, and constructed
removed from public service by the 1937 Constitution.
women in a domestic role. However, it must be said
From a feminist perspective this was not unlike other
that the 1990s saw the bans on homosexuality,
patriarchal
societies
in
which
women
were
19
subordinated. In this patriarchal state the family was
claim to separate nationhood, but any valued cultural possessions of the English where shown to have Gaelic their equivalent. (Kiberd, 1995: 151)
constructed as one of the most important elements of society. Repressing sexuality was another key to gendered WHISC identities. Inglis argues ‘[I]t was
There was English law and Brehon law. The
through the control of sex that the modern Irish mother
Parliament became the Dáil, the Prime Minister the
and family were first established’ (Inglis, 1998 : 188).
Taoiseach, soccer became Gaelic football, hockey
This was due to the nationalist construction of the State
became hurling (Kiberd, 1995: 151) and the list goes
and
biological
on and on. Just as it did not matter that there was not a
reproducers of the nation (Anthias and Yuval-Davis,
homogenous society, it did not matter that some Gaelic
1994: 238). As such, the type of nationalism/ national
revivalist practices, such as Gaelic football, did not
identity adopted was a desexualised Gaelic rather than
exist before they were invented (ibid). The GAA,
a sexualised Celtic identity (Bryne and Leonard, 1997:
which has been referred to as ‘the Catholic Church at
580)
play’ (O’Toole: 1998), became a particular marker of
the
construction
of
women as
the WHISC identity, underscoring the conflation of IRISH: THE NECESSITY FOR DE-ANGLICIZING
Irishness and Catholicism.
IRELAND1
The conflation of Irishness and Catholic
Irish nationalism was a cultural nationalism (Kearney,
Irishness is typified in a statement made by John
1988: 82). As mentioned above, a desexualised Gaelic
Dillion in 1890. ‘The man who is a good Catholic is a
nationalism was adopted over a more overtly
good nationalist and the best nationalists are to my
sexualised
own knowledge the best Catholics too’ (Sandulescu,
Celtic
nationalism.
However,
Irish
nationalism was also constructed as Irish being not
1988:
British. The revivalist approach to nationalism was
Catholicism, and Catholicism tied to Irishness. A
mixed with a Gaelic language revival as well as the
circular relationship is perhaps the best way to see the
institution of national parallelism and a conflation of
intersection of these three social factors.
cause
led
nationalism
was
tied
to
exclusionary rather than inclusionary and is what
the construction of the WHISC identity. revivalist
Hence,
This type of ethnic identity / nationalism is
Irishness and Catholic Irishness which directly affected
The
134).
to
what
is
Pieterse
would
classify
as
‘ethnocracy’.
‘The
appropriately called National parallelism (attributed to
ethnicisation of the state is a familiar process in many
Sean Freine in Kiberd, 1995: 151 ) and is the best way
countries North and South. Nationality itself is often
to describe how the Irish constructed their identity.
defined in terms of the majority ethnicity’ (1997: 373).
There was a dichotomous relationship between what
Pieterse draws a parallel between this type of
was Irish and what was English.
nationalism, the imagined community (Anderson,
Anything English was ipso facto not for the Irish as it might appear to weaken the
1983), and ethnic identity, in so far as ethnocracies imagine homogeneity which, in reality, does not exist. Congruent with many theories of ethnicity is
1 Taken from the speech of the same title by Douglas Hyde November, 1892
the revival of the Irish language. The Gaelic revival
20
was constructed in direct opposition to Anglicisation.
SETTLED:
Although the grand narratives of the Irish people were
SYSTEMS
written in English (e.g., Yeats and Joyce), the Irish
The settled aspect of the WHISC identity comes from
language revival was based on the definition of Irish as
endogamous boundary maintenance in Ireland. Being
not British. This was espoused by the Gaelic League
Irish means being settled and not a Traveller. Just as
and in particular Douglas Hyde;
other parts of the WHISC identity are taken as the
The basic argument of the Gaelic league...was that Ireland must cease to be a mere ‘province’ of England and become instead an Independent nation through the restoration of its ancient Gaelic traditions, and of course, its language. (Sandulescu, 1998: 80)
LAND OWNERSHIP AND SOCIAL
norm, so too is having a sedentary lifestyle (Kenny, 1994: 184-185). The WHISC does not view the Traveller as ‘Irish’. There is much debate surrounding the origins of Travellers.
Some maintain that they are one of
several distinct Celtic groups, others that they are an The Irish language revival was used as a tool
indigenous Irish pre-Celtic group, and a third theory
by the State and the people to define how Irish one
suggests that the Travellers were nomadic Celtic
was. ‘The language was used to set people apart. It
craftsmen (Ní Shuinéar, 1994: 70-71). Regardless of
implied that some people were better than others...It
Irish Traveller origin, they are an ethnic group inside
was part of cultural nationalism which was part of the
Ireland which differentiates itself from the WHISC and
revival’ (Nuala Ni Dhomhnaill, ‘Treo?’, episode 1).
vice versa.
The perception of Irish identity being tied to the Irish
It may be argued that the Irish tie to the land,
language persists today. In 1975 75% of people in
and subsequent differentiation between Traveller and
Ireland believed that language was essential to Irish
settled is due to historical circumstances (see Lee,
identity (Kiberd, 1996: 569). ‘While others simply
1989). Historically, the Irish were forced to migrate
believed that without a sound knowledge of Irish their
and were stripped of their lands. Taking their land
children
Cromwell sent the Irish to the West. In 1640 four
would
have
only
a
two-dimensional
understanding of the national culture’ (ibid:568).
fifths of the land in Ireland was owned by indigenous
The nationalist cause, as a part of the WHISC
Irish; by the time Cromwell was finished only one fifth
identity, also meant a call for the reunification of
of the land still remained in Irish hands (Sowell, 1998:
Ireland. This preoccupation with a united Ireland was the crux of modern Irish nationalism. The nationalists argued that Ireland, as a compact island with a common cultural heritage, North and South, should be one country. As Comerford has argued: [P]hysical geography provides an eloquent argument on utilitarian grounds for political unity… It is important not because it can be proved (which it cannot) but because it is entertained with intensity and tenacity by a great many people. (1988: 4)
64). This forced migration and loss of land has created a tie to the land which does not enable the Irish to comprehend how a person would not want it. Moreover, the social system in Ireland produced a greater tie to the land, since the hereditary and marital systems reinforced the importance of land ownership. If one wished to get married, one had to own land.
In addition, the land was the means of
production in an Ireland devoid of a significant industrial base. The consequences of not owning land were simple and clear, permanent celibacy or emigration. Thus, the tie to the land was enforced in
21
Irish society in its most basic structure, the institution of marriage (Inglis, 1998: 166-170), and by Irish society’s largest institution, the Catholic Church. CATHOLIC: THE CHURCH While the two national aims of reunification and the restoration of the Irish language were the official rhetoric of the state and of political discourse, the main ideology of the Irish State was Catholicism. (Kelly and Rolston, 1995: 598-599)
freedom to worship and preach. The willingness to adhere closely to the Catholic Church was located in a desire to be and be perceived as morally equal, if not superior, to the colonisers. (Inglis 1997: 98)
Arguably, the manifestations of this desire are illustrated by the over development of the Church and its institutions. The Catholic Church was given a special place in the 1937 constitution later repealed in 1972. The continued mixing of
The role of the Catholic Church in Irish society and in the formulation of the WHISC identity cannot be overstated. The Catholic Church is not confined to the religious sphere, but extends into social, political, economic, educational, and cultural spheres. In fact, the term used to describe Catholicism in Ireland is not Roman Catholic but Irish Catholic and is the largest factor in the WHISC identity.
Church and State may be seen in legislative morality and in the preamble of the Constitution: In the name of the Most Holy Trinity, from whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and states must be referred, we the people of Eire, humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, who sustained our fathers through centuries. (quoted in Inglis, 1997: 79)
Inglis argues ‘[I]t is for many reasons that being Irish and being Catholic became synonymous.’ (Inglis, 1997: 17). Fintan O’Toole has argued along the same lines, that: [T]he word ‘Irish Catholic’ does not denote merely a person of a specific faith born in a specific country. They have also come to stand for some third thing born out of the fusion of the twoa country, a culture, and a politics. Catholicism in Ireland has been a matter of public identity more than of private faith... (1998:65) To some extent the role of the church and its amalgamation with other parts of Irish society was historical.
The tentacles of the Catholic Church touched every part of Irish Society and cultural identity: Such was the dominance of the church in other social fields, besides the religious, that is was able to limit and control what people did and said when they met socially, engaged in politics and dealt in the marketplace. The Catholic Church had considerable influence in the way people viewed and understood their world and was able to set parameters for how people behave socially. (Inglis, 1997: 65) An important influence on the way people behaved was the de-emphasis of the individual in Irish
As seen through a postcolonial framework the
society. ‘An emphasis on frugal comfort and
church was a reaction to Britishness and the attempted
suppression of individual interests in favour of those of
Anglicisation of the Irish people.
church, family, community...’ (Inglis, 1997: 75) led to
The campaign led by Daniel O’Connell was for civil religious rights and freedom. It was a struggle for meaning and identity, and for the
a more group orientated identity. Hence the myth of homogeneity and the incessant ‘us/them’ discourses which typify the WHISC identity.
22
SUMMARY
WHISC. This prototypical WHISC, much like the
The argument I have presented in this chapter may
WASP in the USA, has become the ‘invisible centre’
appear brutish, but nonetheless, I argue that the ‘us’ in
in discourses of Irishness. I have chosen to locate these
the Irish context of an ‘us/them’ debate should be
characteristics and created an acronym for the most
located. The imagined homogeneity of the WHISC is
commonly recognised attributes of Irishness because
a powerful way of understanding ‘Irishness’, since it
these characteristics are taken for granted. However,
connotes not only an identity but also a cosmology, a
there is the perception in Irish society that one’s
politics, an ethic, and indeed an ideology.
‘Irishness’ is validated by the number of these ‘boxes’,
Each of the components of the WHISC
or traits that one can tick off. Thus, when ‘us/them’
identity are taken for granted in the Irish context. It is
debates occur in Irish society in relation to immigrants,
possible that some WHISCs actually do exist in
Travellers, the EU, refugees or asylum-seekers, the
Ireland. However, this is not the point, the reality is
‘us’ tends to refer to the WHISC.
that in debates the term Irish or Irishness refers to the
23
CHAPTER 4 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND IMMIGRATIONS 1935 TO 1996 INTRODUCTION: THE BIRTH OF IRISH MOJ to make regulations (otherwise known as
IMMIGRATION POLICY
‘orders’) (Sec. 11). Even though there was existing British legislation, for
The Naturalisation and Citizenship Act of
the purpose of this work, Irish immigration policy
1935 also gave an extremely wide range of powers to
began in 1935 with the passing of the Aliens Act and
the MOJ. The preamble of the Act states that it is:
the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act. These two Acts form the basis of Irish immigration policy even in the 1990s.
The Aliens Act of 1935 delineates the
Minister of Justice’s (MOJ) powers in relation to the regulation of aliens in Ireland including access to work permits.
The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act
establishes
the
Minister’s
powers
concerning
An act to provide for and regulate for all purposes, municipal and international, the acquisition by birth or otherwise of citizenship of Saorstat Eireann [The Irish Free State] and the forfeiture or loss of such citizenship, and to provide for diverse matters connected with the matters aforesaid (Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1935)
Incidentally, both of
This Act continues detailing acquisition of
these Acts were passed on the same day, April 10,
citizenship. Persons born inside of the Irish State (Sec.
1935.
2.1) and persons of Irish decent, born of an Irish father
naturalisation and citizenship.
The
Aliens
Act
of
1935
gave
vast
discretionary powers to the MOJ. It is ‘An Act to provide for the control of Aliens and for other matters Relating to Aliens’ (Preamble of the Aliens Act, 1935). Section 5.1 is a good example of the discretionary powers given to MOJ: The Minister may, if and whenever he thinks proper, do by order (in this Act referred to as an Aliens Order) all or any of the following things in respect either of all aliens or of aliens of a particular nationality or otherwise of a particular class… (Aliens Act 1935, Sec 5.1) This section continues listing several powers of the MOJ. For example, the MOJ may ‘prohibit’ all nonnationals from entering the state, have aliens deported, or even restrict where they may live. Other sections relate to deportation of aliens (Sec. 5.5 a-c); ministerial powers of exemption in the implementation of the act (Sec. 10.); and most importantly, the ability of the
(Sec. 2.2), are automatically granted Irish citizenship. The MOJ does not have much discretion in this particular area, but, the MOJ does have extensive power over naturalisation. Naturalisation is covered in Sections 3 through 18. Section 4.1 is perhaps the most important in relation to our debate. Whenever an application is duly made to the minister for a certificate of naturalisation, the Minister may, at his absolute discretion [emphasis added] but subject to the limitations imposed by this section, either(a) grant such application and issue to the applicant a certificate of naturalisation accordingly, or (b) refuse such applications. Upon further reading of this section the ‘limitations imposed’ refer to whom the MOJ cannot grant naturalisation certificates. For example Section 4.2 eliminates a person of ‘unsound mind’ or under the
24
age of twenty-one.
peace time by the Aliens Act of 1919. (Spencer, 1997: 10) Although there may have been an official
Section. 4.3 (a-d) continues to
outline to whom ‘the Minister shall not’ issue a visa. Moreover, the revocation of visas is covered in several sections. Section 10.1 states that ‘The Minister may at any time, on his own motion and at his absolute discretion, by order revoke any Certificate of Naturalisation issued under this Act.’ This power is extended to spouses and children in sections 11 (b and c) and 12 (b). The only part of the Act that favours
policy of de-anglicizing Ireland, this was certainly not the case with immigration policy, since much of the same language is used and the same attitude taken to immigration. Moreover, the British citizens were exempted from immigration control by the 1935 Aliens (Exemption) Order which established the common travel area.
the ‘alien’ is section 5.1 where it is possible to naturalise a person based on distinguished service to the state. This too is discretionary.
The common travel area between Ireland and the UK was and still is the most salient feature in Irish immigration policy. The British have treated Ireland as
As part of the British empire Ireland was
a member of the commonwealth but have exempted
subject to British laws. There was a devolved
Ireland from controls such as the New Common
Government in Dublin, but the legislation was directly
Wealth Immigration Acts of 1962 and 1968, although
equitable to British legislation. The 1935 Aliens Act
for a brief period in the 1980s there were controls due
repealed the existing British legislation, the Aliens
to an IRA bombing campaign. Ireland has reciprocated
Restriction Act of 1914, and the Aliens Restriction Act
and nationals from both countries are allowed freedom
of 1919, while the Citizenship and Naturalisation Act
of movement and employment in the other.
of 1935 repealed the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Acts of 1914 and 1918. The British legislation was more liberal as regards citizenship. Citizenship was constructed in the British legislation to support Civis Britannicus sum (Spencer, 1997: 21) which created a civic form of British citizenship based on the
Having
laid
the
groundwork
for
foundations of Irish immigration policy, I will now briefly examine its historical implementation. There were changes made to this legislation over time, and these
will
be
acknowledged
with
the
implications examined.
imperial system. Naturalisation was constructed in the same way as the 1935 Act in Ireland. The 1935 Aliens
1935 TO 1956: IRRITANTS TO THE BODY
Act uses much of the same language as the British
POLITIC
Acts it repealed and is equally restrictive. As a result the Irish Free State inherited an outlook on immigration that was exclusionary and racist. For example: The 1905 [British] Aliens Act … inspired by the arrival of large numbers of mainly Jewish migrants from Eastern Europe, was the first legislation designed to limit entry to the United Kingdom. The anxieties of the war led to the Aliens Restriction Act of 1914 which was extended into
the
Consider, for instance, the question of tolerance for other cultures. One of the greatest paradoxes of Irish history after the foundation of the State is the complete contradiction between the expectation, on the one hand, that Irish people had a right to emigrate to wherever they could, and on the other, the great reluctance to allow immigration into Ireland, even in the extreme circumstances of Jewish refugees fleeing the Holocaust. (O’Toole, 1998: 162)
major
25
- Ireland, they say, has the honour of being the only country which never persecuted the Jews... And do you know why?... - Because she never let them in, Mr Deasy said solemnly... (Joyce, 1960: 44)
war…’ (Keogh, 1998: 192). Ireland was not unique, as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand had a similar record (Keogh, 1998:194), inheriting the same antisemitic attitudes from the British 1905 Aliens Act. Irish policy toward Jewish refugees is perhaps best summarised by S.A. Roche in 1946:
It is impossible to ascertain exactly how many
Our practice has been to discourage any substantial increase in the Jewish population. They do not assimilate with our own people but remain a sort of colony of a world-wide Jewish community. This makes them a potential irritant in the body politic and has led to disastrous results from time to time in other countries. (as cited in Keogh, 1998:161)
Jews came to Ireland before WWII started, since there is no statistical information available. ‘A memorandum from the Department of Justice in 1953 stated that there was no record of the number of aliens…that were of Jewish blood’ (as noted in Keogh, 1998: 291; ref. no. 217). About 42,000 Jews emigrated to Britain, 30,000 went to France, and approximately 85,000 to the USA and Latin American respectively (Keogh,
The debates surrounding the refugee crisis
1998: 142). The Irish government did not look upon
during the war years led to the Aliens (Amendment)
Jewish immigrants favourably.
Order of 1946 which created a hierarchy of
In general, I think that the Jewish community in this country should not be increased by way of immigration, except in cases where the immigrant is a definite acquisition to the State. So long as we have (in common with so many other countries) the problem of unemployment, I feel that it is wrong to admit aliens about whom we cannot be certain that they will not compete with our citizens in the labour market. (Ruttledge, as cited in Keogh, 1998: 125) This was the position held by Minister of Justice P. J. Ruttledge, a post he held until 1939. Irish officials were not only concerned with Jewish competition in the labour market but also feared that they would not be able to leave, because Germany would not accept them back, and they no longer had
immigrants. Nationals of: America, Belgium, Holland, France, Italy, Liechtenstein, Scandinavian countries, and applicants for tourist visas were to have their applications considered favourably. Second preference was given to citizens of ‘distant’ European countries including Germany, Austria, and, Greece, providing their ‘business’ was not contrary to Irish interests. The final group addressed were ‘stateless persons’, or refugees; this was reserved for Eastern Europeans. Ireland would accept refugees on the condition that they were of good character and that they not seek permanent residence. Interestingly, these preferences are seen in MacGreil’s (1996) work on social distance and
underscore
the
WHISC
codification
in
immigration policy.
any rights to German citizenship (Keogh, 1998: 128).
From the post-war period to 1956 Ireland’s
The situation of Jewish refugees was not aided by the
approach to refugees, be they Jewish or otherwise, did
head of the Irish delegation in Berlin the openly
not change. Ireland did decide to make its refugee
antisemitic Charles Bewley (Lentin, L., 1997).
policy more ‘liberal’. ‘The Minster for Industry and
‘Whatever the number - and it may have been as few
Commerce said that he would be in favour of a liberal
as sixty - it was insignificant for the six years of
policy on a highly selective basis’ (Keogh, 1998: 206).
26
This statement typifies the general feeling in Irish
(Commission on Emigration, 1956: 132). The majority
policy making circles. Immigrants would be admitted
of these 65,000 people (49,000) were born in Britain.
to Ireland only if they had something to offer the state,
This demonstrates the persistent migration of people of
and Ireland did accept a small number of refugees in
British origin into Ireland (ibid.) and is not surprising
the early 1950s. Between 1950-52 107 refugees were
considering the common travel area. Jews were not
admitted (Ward, 1996: 135). The majority were
allowed to enter the country because of the possibility
covered by the 1946 Aliens Order. 265 poles, 300
of their ‘destabilising effect’ on society, while
Germans and some 30 Austrians were admitted to
Americans, British, Canadians, and Australians of Irish
Ireland although only a fraction were refugees (ibid.).
or British birth or association were allowed to
The refugees were allowed to enter Ireland mostly as a
immigrate without restriction.
result of the involvement of the International Red
Irish policy is what Goldstone (1999) refers to as ‘old
Cross.
Irish racism’.
The antisemitism in
Available statistics for the foreign born population further illuminate Irish policy. Although
1956 TO 1990: THE ROLE OF THE UN
Ireland was a net emigration country, there was
Ireland became a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention
persistent immigration during the first part of the
Relating to the Status of Refugees in 1956 when it
century (see fig. 4.1 ). Immigrants from America,
joined the UN. Irish immigration policy entered a new
Canada and Australia were entering Ireland on a
era because Ireland was intent on participating in the
FIGURE: 4.1 Immigration of Persons of British and Irish Nationality from Overseas - 1924 to 1950 YEAR AMERICA CANADA AUSTRALIA OTHER TOTAL 1924-1929 7,449 1,444 1,140 2,585 12,618 1930-1934 9,653 1,451 1,026 2,307 14,437 1935-1939 3,766 448 466 1,727 6,407 1940-1945 * * * * 12,500 1946-1950 1,542 457 371 2,792 5,162 TOTAL 1924-1950 22,410 3,800 3,003 9,411 51,124 * No information available for these years Source: Compiled from The Commission on Emigration and Other Population Problems: Statistical Appendices 40-41
regular basis. However, these migrations had been
new world organisation. However, this only meant
ignored because of the ease of assimilation of these
admitting minimal numbers of programme refugees,
peoples. A total of 51,124 persons born in countries
not an overhaul of immigration policy.
other than England or Ireland immigrated from 1924 to
The 1951 convention defines a refugee as:
1950.
…a person who has fled his or her country and is unable or unwilling to return because of a ‘well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political
The 1946 census recorded 98,900 foreign born persons resident in Ireland. After subtracting the 33,500 persons born in the North, the foreign population comprised 2.2% of the total population
27
opinion…(Article1.(A.2)1951Conventi on Relation to the Status of Refugees).
lack of statistics, and interestingly, immigration is
Thus signatories must form internal policies
produces the following policy recommendation:
to process applications for asylum and process them
In our view, it would not be desirable or practicable to try to increase the population by increased immigration of aliens. While Ireland, with great numbers of her people living in other countries, should be slow to refuse admission to desirable immigrants, the present immigration policy, in our opinion, is as liberal as the circumstances permit. ( Commission on Emigration, 1956:133)
considered a
accordingly. ‘Most fundamentally international law obligates states not to reject foreign asylum applicants if such rejection entails their being returned to a place where they are in danger of being persecuted’ (Suhrket and Zolberg, 1999: 143): this is known as the ‘nonrefoulement principle’. The 1951 convention was limited to persons who became refugees prior to
‘population
problem’.
The
report
January 1 1951. However, it forms the cornerstone of international refugee law while the 1967 New York Protocol makes refugee status universal regardless of
In 1956 the Commission on Emigration and other Population Problems reported to the government. In a report of over 500 pages little more than a page was dedicated to immigration. In fact, more space was provided for information on animals and crops (for example see pp. 373-387). There was a better understanding of agricultural products than there was of population flows, and this is somewhat puzzling as report
focused
on
Nationality and Citizenship Act which repealed the 1935 Act. The 1956 Act is not substantively different
the date of forced migration.
the
1956 also saw the passing of a new
‘population
problems’.
Statistical comparison includes the tonnage of cakes and biscuits exported between 1930 and 1950 (Commission on Emigration,
1956: 379).
This
illustrates another pattern of Irish immigration namely
in body or spirit of the law. The most notable changes are in references to 1922, the founding of the state, as regard citizenship.
However, it must be noted that
Sections 8.1 and 20 change the citizenship status of women married to Irish nationals in an exclusionary manner while Section 16 (d) and (e) exclude spouses of Irish women from being automatically naturalised as was the case under section 16.1(b) of the 1935 Act. In 1956 Ireland accepted a group of 530 Hungarians, the first of several groups of programme refugees. Other groups included Chileans, Vietnamese, and Baha’is (see fig. 4.2). Examining
these
programme refugee groups illustrates continuing trends in Irish immigration policy.
28
Figure. 4.2: Programme refugees in Ireland 1956 to 1990 Year/Group
Family Reunification
Amount
Reason for Acceptance
1956 Hungarians
530
No
A big show off to show what we could do
1972 Chileans
120
No
Pressured by UNHCR and Catholic NGOs
1979 Vietnamese
220
1985 Baha’is
Yes, in 1981, 1985, 1987, 1991
25
Pressure by UNHCR and NGOs Pressure from Irish Baha’is community and NGOs
No
Source: Keogh, 1998; Refugee Agency, 1998; Ward, 1996; and Ward, 1999
First and foremost, with the exception of the
During the 1960s a number of foreigners
Hungarians, Ireland was reluctant to accept refugees
entered the state, and one of the largest groups was
and often had to be pressured by the UNHCR or by
German.
NGOs, and even then the numbers of refugees
polices which sought to develop industry in Ireland. In
accepted were negligible. When Ireland did accept
1961 there were 388 Germans resident in Ireland
programme refugees there was little cost to the State as
(Census, 1962), but by 1971 this number increased to
the UNHCR paid for the majority of their maintenance.
2,066 (Census, 1971). This represents a net increase of
In addition the Chileans were accepted because they
some 1700 persons or a 432% increase in the number
were Catholic, and there were restrictions placed on
of German residents in Ireland. The official statistics
the admission of Hungarians to ensure they were
understate the number of Germans resident in Ireland,
Catholic as well (see Ward, 1996; 1999). One also
because there were certain tax advantages for Germans
notices that there is little provision made for family
claiming Germany as their primary residence (see
reunification with the exception of the Vietnamese.
O’Brien,
However,
Irish
demonstrates a continued growth in the German
government by the UNHCR is a marked change and
population in Ireland although not as significantly as
demonstrates Ireland’s responsibilities in the larger
the growth from 1961 to 1971 (Census, 1981).
the
‘pressure’
applied
to
the
global community. Interestingly Ireland did not
This was partially due to Irish economic
1992).
Other
Subsequent
groups
census
immigrated
information
during
these
participate in UNHCR sponsored refugee programmes
decades for reasons of ecology or other ‘green’ factors.
from Africa in the 1960s, 1970s, or 1980s although
They are referred to as ‘countercultural immigrants’,
there were other immigrant groups entering the country
‘60’s dropouts’, or hippies (Kockel, 1991: 74). These
during this time.
immigrants, including people Kockel refers to as
29
‘hobos and drifters’, are very hard to track statistically
roughly the same amount as a percentage of total
since they may not be sedentary during the census of
population (Eurostat, 1986).
the population. Furthermore, they often do not declare
The majority of foreign nationals in Ireland
residency in Ireland as many have become politically
(186,959 persons) were from the UK. However, there
inactive, or live on self sufficient farms and have little
is a noticeable non-EU contingent of approximately
contact with the ‘locals’ (ibid.: 75-77). This migration
12% of the foreign born population in Ireland or some
continued throughout the 1970’s to rural parts of
19,386 persons. The next largest group of foreign born
Ireland.
residents in Ireland was 16,591 from America. Finally, In the early 1970s due to an economic down
turn Europe ‘closed’ its doors.
Several countries
including France, Germany, and the UK, passed
8,089 persons from other EU nations were resident in Ireland in 1981. These statistics demonstrate a continued migration from Britain and the US.
legislation in early 1970s to limit the amount of
There was another change in the Irish
immigrants coming into their states (Cornelius, 1994;
Citizenship and Nationality laws in 1985. The 1985
Hammar, 1985). Many states had an official zero
Amendment to the 1956 legislation redressed the
immigration policy and Ireland followed suit when the
gendered language of the 1956 act by either taking out
Department of Justice issued the Aliens order of 1975.
the word ‘he’ or replacing the word ‘woman’ with
This order overhauled visa requirements for third
‘person’, meaning that all spouses of Irish citizens,
world
countries,
male or female, were given the same right. The only
effectively harmonising Irish policy with other EU
other section of the 1956 Act changed was the fine for
member states.
fraud in the application process for citizenship.
countries
and
some
Western
The migrations of the 1960s and 1970s
However, the 1956 legislation was substantially the
resulted in the 1981 census recording 6% of the total
same as the original 1935 Act, and the amendment
population as foreign-born (see fig. 4.3). To place this
made little change to the existing legislation. In effect,
Figure 4.3: Foreign Born Population Resident in Ireland- 1981
Total Population UK Other Non-EC USA Other EC
Source: Compiled from 1981Cencus and Eurostat 1986 in context, for the same census in Britain there were
the
1935
Act
still
governed
citizenship
2.137 million foreign born residents which constitutes
naturalisation in the Republic of Ireland.
and
30
Ireland was soon to become a net immigration
their peak in 1987 with 545 persons being naturalised,
Available statistics elucidate a change in
but ironically, this was the first year that Ireland began
population flows to Ireland. In 1987 there were 17,200
maintaining statistics on the number of applications for
immigrants to Ireland (Eurostat, 1997). By 1990 the
asylum, which numbered only 50. 1987 is also
annual number had almost doubled to 33,300.
significant, because it was the start of the statistical tracking on immigrants by more ‘reliable’ means.
foreign nationals resident in the state they indicate a
Figure 4.5: Naturalisations and Applications for Asylum 1980 to 1990
1990
Ye a r
1989
indicative of the actual number of non-nationals, since
1988
they held Irish citizenship. The 1989 figures are more
Applications for Asylum
1987
foreign born nationals regardless of whether or not
Naturalizations
1986
Most importantly, the figures from 1981 were for
600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Total
1985
made between the figures from 1981 and from 1989.
1984
(Eurostat 1991). However, there must be a distinction
1983
total of 79,000 foreign nationals resident in Ireland
1982
addition, if one examines statistics for 1989 concerning
1981
In
1980
country.
Source: Compiled from Eurostat 1991
this is specifically what they measure. Work permit information for 1987 to 1991 also illustrates a general trend in Irish immigration
Since the establishment of the State Ireland
policy i.e. an increase of guestworkers (see fig. 4.4).
had ‘guestimated’ the numbers of people leaving and
Figure 4.4: Number of Work Permits Issued and Renewed 1987 to 1991
entering the state. That is to say, the number of births and deaths would be subtracted from the total population, as recorded by the census, and the
YEAR 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987
NEW PERMITS 2381 2205 1677 1438 1101
RENEWALS 1399 1207 884 880 768
TOTAL 3780 3412 2521 2318 1869
remainder would constitute net migration (personal communication with Adian Punch, Head Statistician for Census, CSO: 12/6/99). This method was coupled with the use of the Annual Labour Force Survey, the net passenger balance, the number of visa granted, and
Source: Eurostat 1997 These work permits were used as a specialty visa
the census. This was inaccurate as regards immigration
system, as, on average, 50% were issued to nurses or
flows, since the same process has been proven to be
other medical workers.
the smallest
inaccurate in the UK (see Jackson, 1963). In addition,
percentage of work permits were issued for unskilled
the statistics I have mentioned in this chapter are more
labour. It must also be noted there was a 69% renewal
than likely understated with regards to EU nationals,
rate for these years, which means that on average 172
because, like the Germans, if there were financial or
persons would be eligible for citizenship per annum.
other incentives to maintain one’s permanent residence
Moreover,
During the 1980s there was an increase in the numbers of immigrants. This is also true of the number of naturalisations and asylum-seekers in Ireland.
information available to researchers. In examining the total population and net migration statistics for Ireland from 1960 to 1990 one
Figure 4.5 illustrates these trends. A caveat to these statistics is that there is an absence of refugee information.
in another state this was completely missed by the
Naturalisations hit
notices that, although Ireland was a net emigration country for the majority of the three decades, the total
31
population continued to increase albeit at a nominal
(Refugee
pace (see Fig. 4.6).
reunification, the Bosnian community in Ireland
1998:
10).
2 1.5 1 0.5 0
-0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 88
86
19
84
19
19
82
80
19
78
19
76
19
74
19
72
19
19
70
68
19
66
19
64
19
19
19
62
T otal Population in Millions T otal Net Migration in Thousands
19
family
0.03 0.02 0.01 0
3.5 3 2.5
60
T o t a l P o p ula t io n
Figure. 4.6: Total Population and Total Net Migration 1960 to 1989 4
After
N e t M iga t io n
Agency,
Year Source: Compiled from Eurostat 1997, and Appendix 2 of mid-April Population Estimates 1951 to 1997 During the mid 1970s there was an increase in
numbered 916 in 1996 (Refugee Agency, 1998: 9).
net immigration. However, much of this was due to
Like
government
community consists of a 50/50 split along gender lines
economic
policies
attracting
return
the
Vietnamese
community,
the
Bosnian
migrants (Kockel, 1991: 71) and there were also slow
(ibid.).
persistent migrations of Europeans entering Ireland
status like the Vietnamese. Although the Department
during this time as demonstrated by the 1981 statistics
of Justice criteria for family reunification differed
mentioned above. Much of this was due to the freedom of movement in the EU and the official statistics for immigration in the late 1980s show that the rate of immigration increased persistently from 1987 to 1990. In fact, immigration nearly doubled from 17,200 in 1987 to 33,300 in 1990 (Census, 1991). However, this may be partially attributed to a question concerning previous location of residence in the 1987 Annual Labour
force
Survey
providing
more
accurate
statistics.
The Bosnians were given de facto refugee
slightly from the Vietnamese in regards to gender preference, there is no preference specified for ‘widows and unmarried sisters’ (Refugee Agency, 1998: 7). At this point I must note a general trend in immigration policy not only in the EU but in the Western world.
The intergovernmental Terrorism,
Radicalism, Extremism and International Violence group (TREVI) which consists of the EU member states, Australia, new Zealand, Canada, and the US, is
1990 TO 1996: THE EU TRIAD OF CONTROL
harmonising its immigration policies. A prime example
In 1992, along with other member states, Ireland
of this is the similarity between the safe third country
agreed to take a quota of 200 refugees from Bosnia
principle as seen in the 1996 Dublin convention in the EU and the 1996 IRCA in the USA. This is what
32
Cornelius et. al., (1994) refer to as the convergence
policies. Furthermore, the London Resolution allows
theory.
for manifestly unfounded claims to be decided in an
The
process
of
convergence
or
EU
harmonisation has taken on the official policy of a ‘triad of control’.
The EU formulated a common
response based on a triad of control to separate refugees from migrants and limit the intake of bona fide refugees (Suhrke & Zolberg, 1999: 151-152) The other pillars of the triad are to proactively modify the causes of outflows and to attempt social integration for those refugees allowed in. I shall now examine the EU legislation that operationalises the triad. The
London
Resolution
on
Manifestly
Unfounded Applications for Asylum was passed in 1992 as part of an effort to limit the intake of refugees. Although it was non-binding, it is important to note as it broadly defines a ‘manifestly unfounded’ application for asylum. It also gives signatories a great deal of discretionary
power
in
further
defining
what
constitutes a manifestly unfounded application. Paragraph
7
states
that
a
manifestly
expedited process. Reasons
for
accelerated
processing
of
applications for asylum are outlined in Paragraph 9. 9. All applications which are clearly based on deliberate deceit or are an abuse of asylum procedures. Member states may consider under accelerated procedures all cases in which the applicant has, without reasonable explanation: (a) based his application on a false identity or on forged or counterfeit documents which the applicant has maintained are genuine when questioned about them; (b) deliberately made false representations about his claim, either orally or in writing, after applying for asylum (e) Having had ample earlier opportunity to submit an asylum application, submitted the application in order to forestall an impending expulsion measure (London Resolution 1992)
unfounded application for asylum is one which meets none of the substantive criteria outlined by the 1951
Most importantly, subsection (d) allows states
Geneva Convention or the New York Protocol.
to declare a claim manifestly unfounded if a another
Furthermore, paragraph 6 goes on to outline more
claim has been filed in one or more other countries.
classifications of manifestly unfounded claims.
The caveat to all of these provisions lies solely in
For
example;
Paragraph 10 where it states factors in paragraph 9 can
(b) the application is totally lacking in substance: the applicant provides no indications that he would be exposed to fear of persecution or his story contains no circumstantial or personal details;
not, by themselves neutralise, ‘a well founded fear of
(c) the application is manifestly lacking in any credibility: his story is inconsistent, contradictory or fundamentally improbable.
accelerated
persecution’ as outlined by Article 1 of the Geneva convention. This
allowed process
states for
to
implement
manifestly
an
unfounded
applications for asylum. This resolution established the third safe country principle which allows for deportation of asylum-seekers to the ‘buffer countries’
The resolution does not, however, provide a
of the former Eastern Block. However, the principle of
manner for testing what is ‘totally lacking in
subsidiarity was maintained so that EU member states
substance’, but leaves it to the discretion of national
remained in control of their respective policies.
33
The other major piece of legislation passed in 1992 was the Treaty on European Union (TEU). This amendment to the Treaty of the European Union is the basis for common immigration and asylum policy in Europe. Article K. of the TEU states: For the purpose of achieving the objectives of the Union, in particular the free movement of persons, and without prejudice to the powers of the European Community, Member States shall regard the following areas as matters of common interest: (1) Asylum policy; (3) immigration policy and policy regarding nationals of third countries
and refugee policy in which the Commission underlines that ‘it is impossible to reduce the number of refugees the Member States are considered to protect (Intergovernmental Conference, briefing No. 39: 22/8/1996) This shift in policy was adopted by all member states. The following year the Schengen agreement was implemented. Schengen allows for the free movement of goods, services, capital, and persons inside the EU. As such it is the most comprehensive policy document to date as regards EU immigration policy. Articles 2 through 38 outline the abolition of internal borders and regulate the movement of people in the EU. More specifically, Articles 9-18 cover visa
Other areas include combating unauthorised
policy. Accompanying the agreement was a list of 127
immigration, K.3 (c) and conditions of entry and
suggested countries that should have entry visas for
residence of non-nationals, K.3 (a) and K.3 (b)
EU States.
respectively.
aliens, the majority of whom can move freely within
Although immigration, asylum and visa policy are regarded as areas of common interest, the
Sections 19-24 cover the movement of
the member states for up to four months providing they register with local authorities.
implementation and formulisation of these policies was
The most important sections are articles 28-
left to the individual member states. The restriction to
38, which govern responsibilities for processing
this being Article G.23.1, formally Article 100(c) of
applications for asylum. Article 29(2) states ‘every
the EC Treaty, which gave the Inter-Governmental
contracting party shall retain the right to refuse entry or
Council (IGC) control over visa policy by unanimous
expel any applicant for asylum to a third state on the
decision. Article G.23.2 gave the IGC the ability to
basis of its national provisions and in accordance with
implement emergency visa requirements for countries
its international commitments’.
for up to six months by qualified majority if a third
known as the third safe country principle and is an
country ‘posed a threat’ of sudden inflows of
extension of the third safe party principle as enacted by
immigrants. Under these powers the IGC passed a
the London Resolution in 1992. Moreover, subsidiarity
resolution on the Admission of Third County Nationals
is protected by the statement ‘on the basis of national
for Employment in 1994. The IGC also separated
provisions’, and it is further re-enforced by Article 32:
asylum policy from immigration policy in 1994.
‘The contracting party responsible for the processing
In its communication to the European Parliament and to the council in 1994, the commission made a clear distinction between immigration policy, in which it is necessary to act in a restrictive and preventive manner,
of an application for asylum shall process it in
This is commonly
accordance with its national law’. Thus, harmonisation in EU immigration and asylum policy would seem to be mitigated by the principle of subsidiarity However,
34
many state policies have used EU policy as a building
shopping’ (Garcia y Griego, 1994: 138), i.e. the
block to form more restrictive policies.
practice of applying for asylum in more than one
The Resolution on Minimum Guarantees for
country at a time. As a result changes must be made in
asylum procedures, published in 1995, further re-
individual state policies. Germany which had the most
enforced the Schengen Agreement.
liberal
The IGC does
asylum
policy
in
Europe
due
to
the
‘refer to the principle that asylum procedures will be
constitutional status of asylum-seekers, has since made
applied in full compliance with the 1951 Geneva
changes to its implementation making it more difficult
convention and other obligations under international
to claim asylum (Martin, 1994: 210-211). However,
law in respect to refugees and human rights’ (Vdsted-
the majority of member states have become more
Hangen, 1999: 8). The major effect of this piece of
creative in the fight against refugees and asylum-
legislation is the restrictions it places on member
seekers.
states. In particular it states that no expulsion orders
The French and Dutch governments have
will be implemented as long as no decision has been
declared parts of their largest airports as ‘international
taken on the application for Asylum. However, the
Territory so people cannot claim asylum’ (Suarez-
1992 London Resolution still allows states to process
Orozco, 1994: 251). The European restrictiveness
manifestly unfounded claims in such a manner creating
appears liberal when compared to the Japanese policy
a rather large loophole for member states if not
of no refugees and no asylum-seekers (Layton-Henry,
encouraging them to use this as substantial part of their
1994: 291).
policy.
Ireland,
Several European countries, including
already
had
discretionary
powers
for
The following year the Dublin Agreement
immigration officials at airports and harbours codified.
gained convention status in Ireland. It builds on earlier
Although subsidiarity has long been a
policy initiatives at EU level, most notably in the area
principle of the EU, since the early 1990s there has
of asylum policy. In theory the Dublin Convention
been
means that an application for asylum can be denied if
‘harmonisation’ of immigration policy.
the person had the opportunity to seek the protection of
mostly due to the impending implementation of the
another member state. In practice, however, it has the effect of denying applications and ‘passing the buck’ by returning asylum-seekers to the first European country that they entered.
For example, asylum-
seekers who have travelled to Britain or Ireland by ferry passed through another member state.
As a
result, they are returned to that country for processing, but under the 1992 London Resolution they can then be sent to the ‘buffer countries’ if they have passed through one of them.
The official term for this is
a
movement
among
EU
countries
for
This was
Schengen agreement. As boarders within the EC become increasingly irrelevant, control of the outer European border becomes more important. In north-western Europe there is some anxiety that southern EC member countries (particularly Spain and Italy) will not be able to control entry effectively. (Suarez-Orozco, 1994: 241) In 1996, with these concerns in mind, the IGC published the Joint Position on ‘Pre-frontier Assistance and Training Assignments’. The purpose of this was to
‘burden sharing’.
implement a well developed policy of extra-territorial The Dublin
Convention
has effectively
stopped what western countries refer to as ‘asylum
immigration control joining two aspects of the Triad,
35
namely limiting the number of refugees and stemming
aiding third world countries. In 1983 there were 17
the causes of outflows. The preamble to the resolution
NGOs in the state that were co-financing aid work in
justifies its actions as follows:
foreign
Whereas checks carried out on embarkation on to flights to member states of the European Union are a useful contribution to the aim of combating unauthorised immigration by nationals of third countries, which pursuant to Article K.1 (3)(c) of the Treaty, is regarded as a matter of common interest;
countries
(Department
of
Co-operation
Division, Department of Foreign Affairs ‘Irish aid : Co-financing with NGOs: 1983). This was more than advocacy work for refugees/asylum-seekers and immigrants. In 1983 over 50% of the aid went to Africa
and,
incidentally,
to
countries
whose
populations need visas to enter Ireland. This is still the case in Ireland although now Eastern European
Whereas the posting to airports of departure of Member States’ officers who are specialised in such checks, to assist the officers who carry out checks on departure locally on behalf of the local authorities or on behalf of airlines, is a means of helping to improve those checks, as is also the organising of training assignments aimed at airline staff;…(Preamble of IGC Joint Position)
countries are also given a significant amount of aid, and Ireland contributes 25% of all aid through the EU under the Lomè Convention (Department of Foreign Affairs, 1998). This may be a new trend for the EU as it has grown to be the world’s fifth largest aid donor in the 1990s (Department of Foreign Affairs, 1998) , but for Ireland it has been standard operating procedure since 1975 and even earlier through the Church’s
Primarily this policy restrains persons who could possibly attain asylum status in EU countries from reaching them. There is no evidence that humanitarian concerns are being taken into account with this policy. As such, persons may be subject to
collections for the ‘black babies’. Net migration to Ireland from 1990 to 1994 hovered close to zero. In 1995 and 1996 Ireland once again became a net immigration country. Figure 4.7 demonstrates that the majority of immigrants in 1996
prosecution by local officials as a result of EU involvement in Extra-national immigration controls. Secondly, the member states are delegating power to
Figure 4.7: Nationality of Immigrants as percent of Total 1996
transport providers with the penalty of a sanction for carrying a person without proper documents. Finally, UK 21%
it removes a large part of the asylum or immigration process from the state, insofar as actions taken by
Irish 45%
private companies or immigration officials 3000 miles
Other EU 13%
away in a third world country are effectively transparent to advocacy groups, the public, and such refusals are not captured in a statistical format. The third part of the Triad is to proactively modify causes of outflows which is achieved through
Other Non-EU 11%
USA 10%
Source: Adapted from Punch and Finneran, 1999: Table A9
aid to third world countries. Ireland has had a long history of government/NGO partnership in relation to
were returning emigrants. However, migrants from the
36
UK and other EU countries constituted a total of 34%
proactive and only reacted to the crisis after coaxing
of all immigrants. This further demonstrates the
from interest groups inside and outside of the state.
recurrent pattern of immigration in Ireland, since the
David Wyman refers to the failure of the United States
majority of immigrants are from Europe, especially the
to save more Jews as a ‘vast lost chance’ (Keogh,
UK, while the majority of non-European immigrants
1998: 194). The USA has learnt from this and
are from North America.
transformed it into a more liberal policy, while Ireland, it would seem, has not learned from the tragic
SUMMARY
consequences of turning its back on refugees. Finally,
The refugee crisis that struck Europe signals the birth
there is a clear preference given to ‘white’ immigrants
of an Irish immigration policy. This first test of the
in the 1946 Aliens Order and the omission of migration
Irish immigration policy forms the pattern that will
from the UK, the USA, Australia, and New Zealand.
typify Irish policy for decades to come. Primarily,
The convergence of Irish immigration policy
there is a reluctance to allow immigration whether it be
with the rest of the western world is creating a more
for economic or social reasons other than for white
restrictive, more xenophobic immigration policy based
groups. Secondly, there is the legacy left by imperial
on the Triad of Control. Ireland continues its long
laws which were meant to keep out Jews and people of
tradition of not allowing in migrants and instead taking
‘colour’, centralising an enormous amount of power in
collections for ‘black babies’ through aid agencies. I
one ministry. Perhaps most importantly, this is a
will now address the contextual discourses of current
precedent, inasmuch as the government was not
Irish immigration and immigration policy.
37
CHAPTER 5 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND THE DISCOURSES OF IMMIGRATION Jason King suggests the Social Darwinist INTRODUCTION
discourse of the ‘new’ migration to Ireland is
There is one term which we should have banned long ago in the discussion about racism in Ireland. It is the sanctimonious weasel–term ‘asylumseeker’, with its implications of refugeedom from tyranny preventing any reasoned conversation about the actual growth of both immigration and racism here. (Myers: 23/3/98)
dichotomous to the older Gothic discourse of emigration: [U]nder the rubric of Social Darwinism, immigrants to Ireland, mainly asylum-seekers and refugees, are associated not with human rights violations but economic survival strategies, competition for limited resources, and outright opportunism, as the ‘spill over’ of other nations’ poverty that puts Ireland’s capacity to sustain its own populace under strain. (King, 1999: 52)
This statement by Irish Times columnist Kevin Myers is typical of the current discourse surrounding immigration in Ireland. There has been a debate over immigration in the press, political, and public circles,
Throughout recent history, refugees have been
because the number of asylum-seekers has increased. What is most notable about this discourse, is its dehumanising nature.
There has been an overt
discourse based in Social Darwinism and a parallel discourse based on statistics which have caused asylum-seekers and refugees to be dehumanised. Furthermore,
these
discourses
demonstrate
the
conflation of immigrants, refugees, and asylum-seekers with people of colour or those who are non-WHISC. The end result has been more restrictive policies in relation to immigration as a whole.
viewed in economic terms either as an added competition in the labour force or as a burden to the State,
but
the
prevailing
discourse
does
not
differentiate between refugee and asylum-seeker. There
is
an
equation
in
Ireland
between
refugee/asylum-seeker and people of colour. There is a further conflation of immigrant and refugee/asylumseeker. The end result being the Irish discourse of immigration referring to people of colour, the most notably non-WHISC element in society, which is equitable to the discourses of refugees in the UK (see
THE DISCOURSE OF IMMIGRATION, REFUGE
Kaye, 1998). As such, immigrants/refugees/asylum-
AND ASYLUM
seekers are perceived as people of colour.
Against the backdrop of Ireland’s transition from an emigrant to an immigrant host society, an emergent discourse of Social Darwinism has gradually superseded its Gothic Predecessor, to reconstruct Irish migratory processes in terms of ‘floods’, ‘tides’, and as a variant of natural disaster. (King, 1999: 52)
In the early years of this decade and prior to that, our relatively high unemployment rates and low social welfare payments ensured that illegal immigrants invoking the asylum convention targeted the more prosperous countries - even small ones like Denmark and Finland. Let us be clear about it. Our current economic boom is making us a target. We are
38
firmly established on the map as a desirable place in which to seek refugee status and we should develop and shape our policy response with that in mind. (Minister of Justice, John O’Donoghue, speech delivered to IBEC, 21/10/98)
constitute a major change in Irish immigration policy by removing discretionary powers from the MOJ and the Department of Justice’s bureaucracy. Other major innovations in this legislation are sections 15 and 16. Section 15 makes provisions for the establishment of a ‘Refugee Appeal Board’. ‘The
The previous quote summarises the attitude of
appeal board shall be independent in the exercise of its
the MOJ towards immigrants, refugees, and asylum-
functions under this act’ (section 15(2)). Had this been
seekers in particular. ‘Bogus’ refugees are ‘targeting
implemented, the MOJ would have lost a significant
Ireland’ through illegal immigration. On August 29,
amount of control over refugee and asylum policy.
1997, the MOJ John O’Donoghue signed an order that
The appeals board itself was designed to be
allowed the Dublin Convention to enter into effect on
independent of the Commissioner and to have the
September 1. The Minster ‘said that it [the Dublin
ability to overturn the findings of the Commissioner
Convention] ultimately had the effect of ensuring that
(sec. 17.2.(b)) or recommend an investigation be
Ireland’s resources could be devoted to dealing with
carried out by the Commissioner (sec. 17.2.(d)).
the application for asylum where the state clearly had a
Overall this peace of legislation was extremely
responsibility’ (DOJ press release, 29/8/97). The press
progressive by Irish and European standards alike.
release adds that ‘one of the effects of the orders made
With the change in Government in 1997 there was
today is to set out in Irish law who is a refugee’(ibid.).
reluctance to implement it. In February 1999 the MOJ
This statement, in fact, is a half truth or, at least a,
referred to the 1996 Refugee Act as ‘well intentioned
manipulation of the truth. The Refugee Act of 1996
but unfortunately technically inadequate’ (MOJ speech
truly defined who was a refugee in Irish law for the
delivered to UNCHR / EU Refugee Integration
first time. However, it remains largely unimplemented
Campaign, 03/02/99).
due to Government objections over administrative details (Cullen, 12/8/97).
The net affect of this legislation has been to force the MOJ to make changes in the immigration and asylum process in Ireland. For the first time the MOJ
REFUGEE ACT 1996
announced that he would allocate resources to The Refugee Act of 1996 is an expansive piece of legislation, an amalgam of the three spheres of immigration policy.
Sections of the Refugee Act
include the Dublin Convention as well as the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees. On the national level it grants broad social and civil rights for refugees in the State (Sections 3-5). On an administrative level Section
6
establishes
a
Refugee
Applications
Commissioner who would be completely independent of the MOJ (sec. 6 (2)). This in and of itself would
immigration and asylum which meant three full time job positions (Ward, 1999: 47). Due to the limited amount of resources allocated, the processing time was lengthy as in most other European countries.
The
average length of the review of an application for asylum is over two years (Dáil Debates, 4/2/99). Over the past two years the resources for processing asylum claims has increased to 170 full time staff (DOJ Press release, 21/7/98).
39
The justification for non-implementation of
discourse existed in late 1996 and early 1997 as the
the Refugee Act of 1996 came from the discourse
justification for the Aliens Order of 1996. This Order
based very much in King’s argument. Headlines such
implemented immigration checks at ports of entry for
as ‘Gardai struggling to stem tide of illegal
flights, trains, and ferries coming form the UK via the
immigration’ (Cullen, 27/8/97) and ‘Gardai investigate
common travel area (Tynan, 26/6/7).
asylum
were
accounts at the time demonstrate the conflation of
ubiquitous in Irish news papers at the time. Earlier
immigrant / refugee / asylum-seeker and illegal
headlines read ‘5000 refugees flooding into Ireland’
immigrant with a person of colour.
welfare
frauds’
(Cullen,
29/8/7)
News paper
(Irish Independent, 29/5/97) and ‘Services face
‘How else are these immigration officers to
overload as refugee flood continues’ (Sunday Business
do their job, other than by singling out those faces
Post, 18/5/97).
which are black, or yellow, or in some way different
What entails from such calamitous imagery, then, is a growing sense of necessity for extraordinary measures and the use of discretionary powers to ‘contain’ the refugee crisis, including the suspension of statutory protections for asylum-seekers in the delayed implementation of the Irish Refugee Act. (King, 1999: 53)
from the Irish [WHISC] norm?’ (Cullen, 8/8/97. News accounts detail how immigration officers were targeting people of colour, ‘Officers accused of targeting
black
passengers’
(Cusack,
18/10/97).
Cusack stated that Gardai were boarding trains entering the state from the north and ‘asking rail staff if there were ‘any black people’ aboard’ (Cusack,
Judicial review has been the result of the
18/10/97). This type of headline has decreased, but the
partial implementation of the 1996 Refugee Act. Since
content remains (for example see The Irish Times,
September of 1997 an asylum-seeker has had the
1/17/98).
immigration
Illegal immigration is a central dimension of
This was partially in
this discourse. The term ‘illegal immigrant’/’alien’,
response to criticism by the UNHCR (Cullen, 7/8/97).
demonstrates a macro and micro relationship. On a
On 19 February, 1999, the MOJ announced the
macro level it exhibits Ireland’s position as a wealthy
implementation of the Refugee Legal Service, an
western country. On a micro level it illustrates a
independent department, to provide legal advice and
dominant/subordinate relationship between citizen and
representation to asylum-seekers (DOJ press release:
immigrant. In both cases the dominant position is Irish,
19/2/99). Furthermore, in July of 1999 the Department
and as such, the term is as important to the discourse as
of Justice announced that ‘today an asylum-seeker
anything else.
ability to appeal a decision made by officials (Cullen, 27/8/97).
arriving in the state is likely to be interviewed within
Ron Kaye has studied similar phenomena in
eight to nine months and an appeal would be heard, by
the UK by examining media portrayals of asylum-
one of the four independent appeals authorities, with in
seekers. The media portrayals of ‘bogus’, ‘phoney’ and
three month of the appeal being lodged’ (DOJ press
‘economic’ refugees devalued public and political
release: 8/7/99).
perception of asylum-seekers (1998: 163) and had the
The discourse of natural disaster justified the non-implementation of the 1996 Act. A parallel
effect
of
immigrants:
equating
asylum-seekers
with
illegal
40
This has occurred through a narrowing by public policy makers of the definitions of refugee status, and a blurring of the distinctions between refugees and immigrants, on the one hand, and ethnic minorities on the other. (Kaye, 1998: 163) Kaye found in a previous study (1995), and indeed in 1998, that newspapers ‘framed’ the news in line with the political agenda of government officials
I argue the same process has occurred in Ireland. Illegal immigration stories began appearing in Ireland in early 1997. ‘Illegal refugees using taxis to cross border’ (Cullen, 3/9/97) and ‘Border checks weed out illegal immigrants’ (Cullen and Keogh, In
Moreover, provisions have been made to confiscate any means of transport used in such an act (ibid.). The MOJ’s official position is that this is to stop the ‘exploitation’ of vulnerable people. Some would argue that the MOJ wanted to keep people from
(1998: 177-178).
8/8/97).
be guilty of an offence punishable on conviction on indictment to an unlimited fine of up to 10 years in prison or both. (DOJ press release, 21/6/1999)
the
discourse
surrounding
illegal
immigration the Social Darwinist discourse of natural disaster and the discourse of statistics converged. ‘Number of asylum-seekers doubles’ (Cullen, 17/1/98). The title uses statistics in the same way as the Social Darwinist discourse uses the language of natural disaster to raise public concerns. The contents of the article reveal that 98% of all asylum-seekers entered Ireland illegally. In reaction to this and several other well publicised incidents the Government formulated a
entering the state in shipments of goods, because Ireland would have to consider them for asylum It is interesting to note that this discourse of illegal immigration is perpetuated by policy makers. ‘The minister said that it was essential that we fully honour our international obligations in respect of genuine asylum-seekers and refugees [emphasis added] who had nothing to fear from this legislation’ (ibid.). By using the term ‘genuine’ in relation to asylumseekers and
refugees,
the
DOJ
underpins the
perception of refugees and asylum-seekers as illegal immigrants, not associated with persecution, such as the Kosovans, but as economic migrants. There has been some positive discourse of immigration in Ireland, but, this has been mostly in the opinion and editorial sections of the press. For
policy response.
example, articles such as ‘Immigrants do not have to ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (TRAFFICING) BILL
be seen as a problem’ (The Irish Times, 21/10/97),
In 1999 the Minister of Justice announced the Illegal
‘Ireland of the Welcomes’ (The Irish Times, 2/12/97),
Immigrants (Trafficking) Bill. This Bill in name and
and ‘80% of refugees have third level training’
content is exactly what it states, a policy to stop illegal
(Pollack: 27/4/99) have attempted to show immigrants
immigration.
It is part of a comprehensive list of
in a different light, but such articles have been few and
recommendations made by the Inter-departmental
far between. With the exception of the Kosovan
Committee
Asylum-
refugees, who were positively constructed in the
Seekers and Related Issues, which will be discussed
Western world, refugees in Ireland have been
later. The Bill states that:
surrounded by a negative discourse. The use of a
on
Immigration,
Refugees,
any person who organises or knowingly facilitates the entry into the state of a person whom he or she knows to be an illegal immigrant will
statistical discourse in order to construct refugees as a possible asset to Ireland is interesting. It is part of a larger debate of asylum-seekers’ right to work, but the
41
enigma of the Irish discourse creates a no win situation
and asylum-seekers the Immigration Control Platform
for immigrants. If refugees/asylum-seekers don’t work,
was formed (Cullen, 1/12/98) opposing an increase in
they are ‘welfare frauds’, and if they do work they, are
immigration.
taking ‘our’ jobs.
These discourses have led to the use of more
Due to the current ‘Celtic Tiger’ economy
discretion in implementation of immigration policy.
Ireland has made several changes to its work visa
The role of discretion in Irish immigration policy is
policy: ‘essentially, a number of categories of non-EU
most notable in refugee/asylum policies. When
nationals who previously required work permits in
examining discretion refugee/asylum policy one must
order to take up employment in the state will no longer
keep in mind that;
require such permits’ (DOJ press release, 1/4/99). This includes persons posted to Ireland by multi-national firms for a period no longer than four years, and employees sent to Ireland for training for a maximum period of three years. Both of these categories limit naturalisation through residence by limiting the amount of time one may be resident. This is consistent
[T]he ‘case’ is constructed over time and is contributed to by a myriad of discretionary decisions made by different agents at different points in the process. Thus discretionary decisions that are made are not in any simple way top down decisions, but rather they are multiple, cumulative and issue from diverse locations. (Pratt, 1999: 218)
with the move in policy making circles to possibly change Irish citizenship laws so that children of immigrants
will
not
be
automatically
granted
citizenship (The Irish Times, 16/4/98). Finally, spouses, children of Irish nationals, and ‘persons who have been given temporary leave to remain in the state on humanitarian grounds’ (DOJ press release, 1/4/99) have the right to work without a work permit. Labour market pressures have also led to an increase in work visas for foreign workers. ‘Ireland
Discretion is a key term in Irish policy because entry to the State is at the discretion of an immigration officer. As such, persons seeking asylum in Ireland will have their case heard by an immigration officer who can make a decision, based on a set of criteria, implementing the Dublin Convention or refusing an application for asylum. If an application for asylum is rejected by an immigration officer, the refusal to enter the state is not enacted until the applicant has had the case reviewed. At this stage
faces a flood of more than 15,000 foreign workers in
there is another discretionary decision. ‘A person duly
the next 18 months’ (The Irish Times, 21/8/99) was the
authorised by the Minister may decide to terminate
lead story on the front page of The Irish Independent,
further examination of the case on the grounds that it is
once again depicting the ‘other’ as an inhumane
manifestly unfounded and to refuse the application for
natural disaster. The reality of the situation is that
refugee status accordingly’ (DOJ procedures for
Ireland is heading down a path well travelled by other
processing asylum claims in Ireland). This stems from
European countries, such as Germany and Switzerland.
the 1992 London Resolution.
Upon appeal of this
The decision not to take a more liberal stance
decision there is another level of discretionary decision
towards permanent immigration fuels the current
making, and the appeals authority can recommend to
discourse and is a continuation of the work visa policy
the MOJ that the decisions should either stand or be
of the 1980s. In response to the increase in refugees
considered substantively.
42
The case is then decided by a ‘duly authorised
discursive context statistics are descriptive and
officer of the department’ who will make a decision
prescriptive. Media accounts and Government statistics
based on the recommendation of the appeals authority.
describe the current situation, but the manner in which
This is a discretionary decision in and of itself, and,
they are presented forms the justification for policy
moreover, it is also arbitrary in that the official takes
measures.
into account ‘considerations of national security and public policy’ (DOJ procedures for processing asylum claims in Ireland). These discretionary powers have been used over time to exclude people from Ireland who otherwise could have entered the state. For example, in June 1999 there were two well publicised cases, and in both cases the non-nationals did not need entry visas to enter Ireland. The first was the refusal and consequent detention of seven Poles (The Irish Times, 16/6/99).
This was followed by the refusal of a
Japanese woman the same week (Cullen, 18/6/99). In
On a per-head of population basis and the basis of one statistical calculation, we [Ireland] are currently ranked fourth in Europe with the major industrial powerhouse economies of Germany, and the Netherlands ahead of us. (Minster of Justice, John O’Donoghue, speech delivered to IBEC, 21/10/98) Statements such as this demonstrate how statistics can be manipulated for political means and underline
the
current
statistical
discourse.
The
selection of ‘one’ statistical calculation illustrates this
both cases the refusal to enter the country was based
point: ‘[C]laims by politicians and public opinion as to
on ‘well founded’ doubts of the intentions of the
a likely invasion supported by appealing to such
persons involved.
figures’ (Barbesino, 1998: 156). The current discourse in Ireland bares witness to this.
THE STATISTICAL DISCOURSE While processes of interpretation and negotiation between different actors are crucial in establishing what is to be counted, official statistics play a significant role in shaping the agenda of policy makers, social scientists and public opinion and thus are critical not just in the development of theoretical discourses on migration but also in the development of migration policy. (Barbesino, 1998: 143) Statistics ought to be descriptive, but many times they are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post, for support rather than illumination. In a
Without in any way prejudging the claim of any individual, it must be accepted that, based on international recognition rates as well as experience here in Ireland, the majority of asylumseekers will be found not to come within the definition in the UN Convention and will not be in circumstances which would merit the granting of leave to remain here for other reasons. (DOJ Press release, 15/7/98)
43
Through the lens of statistics asylum-seekers
refugee and immigration data is collected and
are discursively constructed as illegal immigrants.
published by the Department of Justice. As such all
Moreover, there is a subtle undercurrent of justifying
information in the national media, Eurostat, and the
high denial rates (see fig. 5.1) by comparisons with
UNHCR Statistical Year Book should be the same
Figure 5.1: Refugee Status, Status Determination, Recognition Rates, Applications for Asylum, Applications Deemed Abandoned, and Rejections, 1991 to Dec. 31, 1999 Status/Category 1991 1992(~) 1993(~) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999^ Asylum Applications (+) 30 39 100 400 400 1,200 3900 4630 7762 Total Number of Decisions .. 42 43 58 60 70 630 1520 5248 1951 Convention Status .. 10 10 18 10 30 210 170 511 Humanitarian Status (-) .. 10 10 10 10 10 120 30 0 Rejections .. 22 23 30 40 30 300 1320 4737 Refugee Status Granted on Appeal
..
..
..
..
..
..
4
40
340
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 110 1294 .. 23.8 23.3 31.0 16.7 42.9 33.3 11.2 9.7 .. 47.6 46.5 48.3 33.3 57.1 52.4 13.2 9.7 .. 20 20 28 20 40 330 200 511 .. Information not available or figure is zero - Granted right of leave + Primary applicants, does not include dependents ~ Does not include Bosnian Program refugees ^ Does not include Kosovan regufees Source: Compiled from; UNHCR Statistical Year Book 1997 & 1998, Irish Times , Proceedings of Dail Debates, and Eurostat 1997
Applications Deemed Abandoned Convention Recognition Rate Total Recognition Rate Total Granted Protection
other western countries. Furthermore, there have been
since it all comes directly from the DOJ. There is little
significant fluctuations in statistics as regard refugees
room
and asylum-seekers in Ireland.
Furthermore, the likely argument that Ireland has a
here
for
non-equivalence
of
statistics.
The statistics in figure 5.1 are the best
different classification for its applications for asylum is
statistics that I was able to compile. For these I used
moot. European statistics published specifically state
two different UNHCR statistical year books as well as
whether or not applications include dependants which
Eurostat and The Irish Times. This was necessary as
Ireland’s do not.
there were fluctuations between statistics in the
The Department of Justice seems to be
respective publications. These fluctuations were not
playing a game of three card monty with the statistics
due to estimates being revised for the most recent years
regarding asylum-seekers and refugees. Statistics for
but rather changes in statistics for the earlier years
1995 through 1997 were not reported to Eurostat
represented.
while, at the same time, a comprehensive list of
As discussed earlier there is a conflict between harmonised and non-harmonised data sets, but
statistics were reported to the UNHCR.
However,
these statistics greatly overstated recognition rates. As
44
reported to the UNHCR in 1997 Ireland had a 60%
and concept to emerge. (Barbesino, 1998: 149)
recognition rate in 1996, but the number of applications for asylum was also overstated to the UNHCR. In the Irish media these overstated numbers of applications for asylum shaped the discourse. Only recently have more realistic statistics been published in the media regarding the history of asylum-seekers (See The Irish Times, 16/6/99; 23/3/99, and The Irish Independent, 3/9/99). While the historical statistics have changed, the discourse has not, and Ireland continues to overstate its recognition rate. An Irish Times article stated ‘Nearly 90% of asylum-seekers currently refused’ (Pollack, 23/3/99); my calculations show refusal rates were 90.3% for 1999. However, if the applications granted on appeal are removed, the actual refusal rate would be 96.7%; in other words, only 3.3% of applicants were accepted on their first attempt. Furthermore, the same account stated, based on Department of Justice statistics concerning humanitarian right to remain ‘[I]n 1998 and
A concept that emerges from these statistics is their use to justify policy. Statistics are often used by policy makers to justify more restrictive policy in the Western world (Crisp, 1999), and this has been the case in Ireland.
Although the illegal immigration
discourse was characteristic of this, the current discourse sees statistics taking a predominant role. In the release and consequent vote on the Immigration Bill of 1999 there were several reports based on statistics. Perhaps the most illustrative was published in the Irish Independent and Irish Times on fifth of January, 1999. ‘Little support for ‘open-door’ refugee policy’, was the title. It stated that a recent poll had shown that 6% of people favoured an ‘open-door’ policy, while 69% wanted only the ‘absolute minimum’ allowed in. It was with this justification that the MOJ introduced the Immigration Bill of 1999, later passed in July.
in the first two months of this year it [humanitarian leave to remain] was not exercised once’ (Pollack,
IMMIGRATION BILL 1999
23/3/99). However, the Department of Justice reported
To dispense with the unconstitutional section 5.1(e) of
to the UNHCR that it was used 30 times in 1998
the Aliens Act of 1935, in relation to deportation
(UNHCR Statistical Year Book: 1998). The statistics
powers, the MOJ submitted the Immigration Bill of
in figure 5.1 represent the highest numbers reported in
1999 (Carolan: 23/1/99). It changes the current policy
all sources.
by Ministerial order, and refugee advocate groups,
These statistics are as accurate as possible. However, the variance, …suggests that statistics should be taken at face value and ultimately questions the degree of their adequacy in the light of an ontological understanding of social reality. Rather they should be seen as cultural artefacts taking shape within localised and contingent orders of representation that make it possible for different configurations of sources, definitions
such as ARASI (Association for Refugees and Asylum-seekers
in
Ireland),
have
called
it
a
‘deportation act’. The
Bill
was
drafted
based
on
recommendations of the Inter Departmental Committee on Immigration, Asylum and Related Issues. These recommendations were adopted by the Government in April
of
1998
(Tynan,
20/4/98).
The
Inter-
Departmental Committee submitted its report to the Government in late 1998 – early 1999, but, unlike
45
other reports, is was not made public. Furthermore, the
replaced by the 1999 Act. The Bill only repeals certain
usual process of disclosing the names, departments,
sections of the 1935 Act, leaving it almost entirely
and positions of the committee members was not
enacted. It is ‘An act to make provisions in relation to
followed. The end result is that no one, except the
the control of non-nationals, to amend the Aliens Act,
members of the committee and the MOJ, knows what
1935 and to provide for related matters’ (Preamble to
the recommendations are, or who made them, based on
Immigration Act, 1999). The 1999 Act has the net effect of getting
what information. A general idea of the recommendations can be based on statements made by the MOJ in the media. The committee had recommended, he [MOJ] said, that the ‘new legislation should be brought forward on immigration matters which should cover visas and other pre-entry clearance systems, admissions and refusal of admissions, residence permits and the regulation of employment, long-term inward migration and a more straight forward system for removal of persons who have no permission to be in the State. (Foley, 20/5/1998)
around the High court decision which found ministerial powers of deportation to be unconstitutional, as well as adding more discretionary power to the MOJ’s arsenal. A prime example of this is section 3.1 which makes deportation orders indefinite and more importantly section 3.1(i) which deals with ‘a person whose deportation would, in the opinion of the Minster, be conducive to the common good’. This is both discretionary and arbitrary, because similar powers are granted in section 4.1 allowing the minister to ‘exclude’ non-nationals from the state for reasons of public policy or national security. Both of these
The committee, according to the MOJ, also
provisions would include EU nationals, locking the
recommend a new system of residence permits. Once
door to anyone the Government did not ‘feel’ belonged
this
in Ireland while section 5 would give extended arrest,
system
was
implemented
the
committee
recommend that all state funded providers of; welfare, education, health, employment, training and accommodation should notify the Department of Justice of applicants for said services that do not have appropriate documentation. (Foley, 20/5/98) The legislation
committee on
the
also
trafficking
suggested to
illegal
immigrants, already discussed. Although the Government had the opportunity to make significant changes with this legislation, it seems, upon examination, that it has decided to continue the tradition of the Aliens Act of 1935. A common misconception is that the 1935 Act will be
detention, and removal powers to Gardai and immigration officers. The explanatory memorandum accompanying the Act explains the powers under the act and establishes the spirit of the law: The Bill provides powers, principles and procedures regarding the deportation of non-nationals. It deals with the situation arising out of the ruling by the high court in the case of Laurentiu –v- The Minster of Justice, Equality, and Law Reform (see The Irish Times, 23/1/99). It seems clear that this is a missed opportunity for Ireland to create a fair, just, and transparent policy. The position of Irish NGOs is not unique. Similar groups exist in other EU member states, and the experience in Ireland is similar to that NGOs in
46
other EU states where NGOs have lacked the will or
to Ireland as represented in Figure 5.2. These statistics
the ability to take on forces in their respective
demonstrate the persistent composition of Irish
countries
changes
immigration. As we have seen throughout the history
(Cornelius, 1994: 310). Irish NGOs have the will, but
of Irish immigration, the predominant immigrant group
their ability is questionable, as they have only been
is British. British immigration has consistently
able to affect individual cases and not immigration
comprised 45% or more of
to
make
significant
policy
total immigration.
Similarly, immigration from the EU and the USA has consistently comprised over 30% of total immigration.
Figure: 5.2 Immigrants 1996 to 1998 by Origin as Percent of Total UK
USA
Rest of EU
Non-EU
100% 90% Percent of Immigrants
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Ye ar
1996
1997
1998
1999
Source: CSO Statistical Release November 30, 1999 policy as a whole. The Immigration Act of 1999 was
While non-EU immigration has grown over the years,
pushed through the Dáil despite the objections of Irish
it has never constituted more that 21% of net
NGOs (The Irish Times, 2/7/99).
immigration, from previous information we know that
In Western societies it seems that the ability
at least half of all non-EU immigrants are from
to influence governments is based on media attention
Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, although they are
which raises public support. Furthermore, there are
currently lumped in the non-EU category. These
NGOs that are localised within states or within regions
migrations are absent from the discourse, since the
of states. Ireland has no less than 14 such NGOs which
majority of these immigrants tend to be white. Thus,
advocate
they are closer to the WHISC norm than the ‘others’,
for
refugees/asylum-seekers,
or
new
immigrants, and not much synchronisation between them.
people of colour. The fact that Ireland, in the 2001 census, will
Nevertheless, both the Illegal Immigration (Trafficking) Bill and the Immigration Act of 1999 demonstrate the use of statistical discourse in the formulation and justification of policy. Absent from this discourse is the ‘real’ composition of immigration
be adding a question relating to ethnicity is a case in point (see The Irish Times, 16/6/99), a question which the UK added in its 1991 census. Policy makers obviously still see the state as homogeneous, WHISC –
47
the ethnicity question gives four options, Irish, British,
SUMMARY
Traveller, and Other, thus focusing on the traditional
The discourse of immigration in Ireland is complex.
‘us/them’ dichotomy of Irish as not British, and
On one level there is a conflation of skin colour with
certainly not Traveller.
immigrants, while there is an underlying discourse of
What is occurring currently in Ireland is the same process that occurred in the UK fifty years ago.
further dehumanises refugees/asylum-seekers, and
The claim that the nation state has recently taken on a multicultural character therefore conceals the cultural transformations initiated by earlier migrations, transformations that are now ignored politically in the quest to create a contemporary sense of cultural homogeneity that has to be defended in relation to some new invasion. (Miles, 1993: 117). Miles was writing in relation to the UK and migrations
of
Afro-Caribbeans
and
Asians
in
particular, but it is apparent that the current discourses concerning immigration in Ireland is parallel.
illegality. The persistent Social Darwinism discourse
immigrants, particularly those of colour, but this is not unique to Ireland. As Miles has illustrated in the UK, the recent perception of increased migration conceals earlier migrations in order to form a new sense of homogeneity (1993: 117). This is also characteristic of contemporary Ireland. Now that I have examined both the historical context of Irish immigration policy and the current discourse in
Irish immigration policy, in the final
chapter I return to my framework to see where Ireland is situated in our model.
48
CHAPTER 6 NORMATIVE MODEL RE-EXAMINED
discourses of current Irish immigration; and now I
As the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, said: There is always the danger in the developed world, of assuming that all shortcomings in the area of human rights occur in societies other than our own. While we have much to be proud of in our human rights record, there are those who would argue that we still have some way to go, to demonstrate our genuine commitment to the universal declarations. (Speech to Amnesty International, 27/11/98)
must return to my normative model and examine Ireland in relation to racism. I must ask myself the questions I started with: is Irish immigration policy racist? With the information that I have presented I will re-examine Ireland in relation to my normative model and illuminate the interdependencies in Irish policy. Figure 6.1 depicts the original model (Figure 2.3) in chapter two and Irish policy in relation to it.
INTRODUCTION I have outlined the historical foundation of
Figure: 6.1. Irish Immigration Policy in Relation to Racism
immigration, immigration policy, and located the Open door or
Progressive
Moderate
Restrictive
Liberal
Multi-Ethnic
Closed door or Illiberal
Pluralist
Discriminatory
Restrictive
Xenophobic
Racist
Closed door or Illiberal
Xenophobic
Racist
Irish Policy Tourist Visa Work Visa Naturalization Illegal immigration
Discretionary Power Refugee/ Asylum Policy
49
DISCRETIONARY POWERS AND REFUGEE / ASYLUM POLICY
tool for keeping people with ‘Jewish’ features out of Ireland in the 1930s and 1940s (Lentin, L., 1997).
Rather than considering discretion as the absence of governance, discretion is considered here as a powerful form of governance, one which facilitates the translation of certain social concerns into exclusionary immigration law, policy and practices. (Pratt, 1999: 201)
Currently applicants for Irish tourist and work visas can be required to attend an interview at the Irish consulate in their state. As I have noted, in refugee and asylum policy there is a high degree of discretion which errs against the immigrant. This is exemplified by refusal rates on appeal of deportation of 100% (The
Discretion has historically been a major component of Irish immigration policy and arguably continues to be its largest component. Discretionary power is difficult to measure for several reasons, primarily because it is hidden from the eyes of the
Irish Times, 27/5/99) and the current recognition rate of 6.7%, which is far below the EU average of 24% (UNHCR Statistical Yearbook, 1998).
the Illegal Immigration (Trafficking) Bill has clearly targeted asylum-seekers.
judiciary and the public. Secondly, there is an absence
it is by no means clear that a state, under general international law, is ever bound to admit an alien. Any absolute discretion which the state may claim, however, is amply circumscribed by treaty and other obligations towards human beings at large, and identifiable groups and individuals in particular (Goodwin-Gill, et al., 1985: 566) The way Ireland and other EU countries have
of statistics concerning refusals at the point of entry. Large amounts of discretionary powers were granted to the MOJ under the 1935 Aliens Act. While there have been changes to refugee / asylum processes, the MOJ retains the final judgement using the recommendations of the Asylum Commission. Discretion in immigration procedures is arbitrary (Pratt, 1999: 215-218): ‘In the view of many who work on behalf of new immigrants and refugees, “arbitrariness” not only leads to inconsistent decision making but also allows for continuing influence of racist or other discriminatory views’ (Pratt, 1999:215).
Furthermore,
tried to circumvent this is by effectively ‘dumbing down’ [sic] the definition of ‘minimum’ which is stipulated
by
the
1951
UN
convention
international law. According to my framework both of these policy areas are racist.
In the Irish context this may be the case, but due to the
VISA POLICIES, NATURALISATION AND
lack of statistical data and immigrant narratives, it is
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRATION
difficult to know exactly how arbitrariness affects immigrants based on creed, colour, religion, or other characteristics. Furthermore,
and
The majority of EU states require visas for countries with which they have a history of unwanted immigration. France, for instance, requires Algerians
discretion
is
used
in
refugee/asylum and visa polices to exclude undesirable persons. For instance, the provisions under tourist visa policies which requires an interview was an important
and Moroccans to obtain tourist visas (Weil, 1994: 183), in Germany it is the Turks (Martin, 1994: 190), and in Belgium South Americans, Colombians in particular (Suarez-Orozco, 1994: 243). Britain has taken
a
different
approach
by
changing
visa
50
requirements depending on international migrations.
to temporary settlement which is inter-related with the
Britain has imposed visa requirements during times of
naturalisation policy of Ireland.
mass exodus, e.g., Turkey and Haiti in
1989, and
Uganda in 1991 (Layton-Henry, 1994: 277).
In Ireland, as previously outlined, one can gain citizenship in several ways. The total of
Ireland in contrast has been slow to change
years (jus domecili)
five
is, in my framework, a fairly
policies regarding tourist visa requirements for third
moderate policy. However, the implementation of this
world countries.
For instance, countries which
policy moves it to xenophobic. In 1997 only 45% of
currently have a large number of refugees need tourist
applicants received certificates of naturalisation. This
visas in order to enter Ireland.
Examples of such
increased to 59% in 1998, but has since dropped to
countries are; Ethiopia, Eritrea, Ghana, Iran, Iraq,
32% in 1999 (end of April, 1999)(information received
Nigeria, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Sri
by personal e-mail from DOJ Citizenship Division,
Lanka, and Zaire (Aliens Order, 1999). In effect this
27/9/99).
policy proactively reduces the entrance of refugees and
Other EU countries such as Germany where
asylum-seekers coming to Ireland since they are
naturalisation can take ten years (Brubaker, 1992: 77)
filtered out in the tourist visa application process. In
have policies which are close to illiberal. France, on
addition it creates illegal immigration, which means
the other hand, has the most liberal naturalisation
asylum-seekers entering the state are illegal, since they
policy, which can take as little as three years of
would otherwise not be allowed into Ireland.
residence in the EU (Cornelius, 1994: 127) based on
It could be argued that Ireland, or any other
both jus soli and jus domecili.
EU member state, cannot unilaterally change its visa
Overall Ireland has a very xenophobic
policies. However, the list of countries attached to the
immigration policy with some elements of a racist
Schengen
mere
policy. It would seem that, if current trends continue,
recommendations. This will remain the case until the
Ireland will develop a racist policy since the
provisions in the TEU are fully implemented and this
recommendations of the Inter-governmental committee
is
Agreement
currently
not
requiring
implemented
visas are
due
to
existing
clearly favour more restrictions. However, at present
agreements in the Nordic states with
Iceland
there is a grey area in Irish immigration policy between
concerning freedom of movement. As such, for the
xenophobic and racist and the next few years will
time being, the visa policy of the EU which is non-
decide Irish policy.
binding consists of a recommended list of countries making the Irish policy restrictive according to my framework. The proposed guest worker system in Ireland moves Ireland towards a more illiberal immigration policy as the government starts to trade in human capital and the ethos moves from permanent settlement
51
CONCLUSION
The most obvious conclusion I can draw from this
I can conclude that in my framework, Irish
work is that more research needs to be done on all
policy is extremely xenophobic, and if the policy
aspects of Irish immigration policy. There is a serious
recommendations
lack of statistical data in relation to: discretion, NGOs,
Committee
tourist, work, and specialty visas, undocumented
Seekers and Related Issues are implemented, Ireland
immigration, naturalisation, refugee and asylum policy
will move towards a more illiberal or racist policy.
and the effects of the UNHCR and the EU. I hope this
The groups most affected by policy reform will be
work is used as a starting point for others to continue
mostly non-WHISC, i.e. blacks and Muslims.
immigration
EU to
is
the
Immigration,
Inter-Governmental Refugees,
Asylum-
Certainly, it is apparent from the policies and
exploring these issues. The
on
of
complicit
Ireland,
actively
in
preventing discouraging
history of
immigrations for Ireland that there is a
codified, yet unspoken, ‘White Ireland’ policy.
It is
migration, especially asylum-seekers, by maintaining a
unspoken in that officials have never said that this is
pre-frontier immigration policy and pumping large
the goal of Irish immigration policy. However, it has
amounts of money into sending countries under the
been codified, and, in practice, Ireland, has not taken
Triad of control. This policy is further reinforced by
large numbers of people of colour and has been
Irish tourist visa policy which excludes people from
particularly absent in UNHCR refugee programmes
most sending countries. Irish work visa policy keeps
involving African countries while white peoples from
the numbers of foreigners to a minimum while, at the
the UK and commonwealth countries as well as the
same time, filling gaps of skilled workers in the labour
USA have been an un-discussed topic in the discourses
market.
of Irish immigration. Similarities between the former When people arrive in Ireland a wide range of
discretion means that they may or may not be allowed
Australian policy and Irish policy are apparent, and this would be an area for more comparative work. The
to enter the state. They could be deported under the
propensity
for
racism
in
Irish
Dublin Convention if they do not conform with the
immigration policy exists. The levels of discretion in
WHISC ideal. The end result is an increase in illegal
refugee and asylum, as well as, visa policy,
immigration since there is no other way for people to
undocumented immigration, and naturalisation are an
enter. Once in Ireland there is little chance that they
area of concern since the negatively ascribed discourse
will be granted asylum, and the UNHCR and pro-
allows
immigrant NGOs have limited power and resources to
translating
affect decisions made by immigration officials. This is
Therefore, Ireland stands at a crossroads. There is an
partly due to outdated and outmoded Irish legislation
opportunity to develop a just immigration policy, but
and the large amount of discretion situated in one
the next few years will be telling.
ministry. policy.
This is the reality of Irish immigration
discretion
to
perpetuate
exclusionary
racist
immigration
attitudes policies.
POSTSCRIPT Since I completed this work in October 1999
(see Egan and Costello, 1999). The MOJ has attempted
immigration has increased. Arguably, Ireland is the
to do this in the past and following the rapid increase
newest country of immigration in Europe; better said,
in refugee status granted on appeal, the MOJ
Ireland is the newest country to debate the benefits,
introduced Amendments to the Illegal Immigration
perils, and responsibilities of immigration.
(Trafficking Bill) ‘aimed at reducing abuses of the
There have been migrations to Ireland of mostly white Europeans for several decades, it is only now that larger numbers of immigrants have come to Ireland who are not ‘white’.
Ireland continues to
struggle with immigration and has regrettably decided
This is best illustrated by the Government’s of
tent
cities (Donohoe,
9/3/00),
Australian style detention centres (Irish Times, 15/3/00), and more recently ‘flotels’ where asylumseekers would be ‘housed’ while their applications were being processed (Donohoe and Newman 30/3/00) and dispersal policies (already implemented). These ideas were considered after the MOJ rejected the recommendations of the Refugee Law Comparative Study, commissioned by the MOJ and conducted by UCD (Humphrys
2/3/00) due to the cost of such
centres. Although refugee advocate groups have argued that refugees are already effectively being held in detention (Haughey, 22/3/00), ‘flotes’ have been approved
by
the
Government
(Donohoe, 11/2/00). Furthermore, an ‘open door’ immigration policy has been ruled out by the MOJ and Government (Irish Times, 4/3/00). Instead the Minister of Justice has decided to focus immigration policy on other areas. Namely the
to treat it as a short term problem.
consideration
judicial review process by failed asylum-seekers’
providing
4000
‘temporary places for asylum-seekers (Donohoe, 9/3/00). This development puts Ireland in step with the majority of EU countries (Coulter, 1/3/00a). However, this is nothing new. The Refugee Comparative Law Study found that Ireland was not acting in accordance with refugee law (Coulter, 1/3/00b). The study found that there was no basis in European Law for the attempts of the MOJ to restrict the right of asylum-seekers to judicial review
expansion
of
a
guest
worker
system.
‘The
Government’s new immigration policy will give preferential treatment to foreign workers in the technology and construction sectors as well as nursing’ (Rafter, 29/3/00). This decision pulls Ireland even closer to an illiberal immigration policy according to the model constructed in this paper. Meanwhile, the Government is influenced by and influences public opinion. On January 4, 2000, the same day that preliminary statistics were released on the number of application for asylum in 1999, The Irish Times had an article entitled ‘MAJORITY WANT LIMITS ON REFUGEE NUMBERS’. The story continued by stating that 74% of respondents wanted the number of refugees strictly limited, while only 17% disagreed (Rafter, 4/2/00). The findings of the poll and its timing were not unlike others released in 1998 which coincided with proposing and passing stricter legislation. In 2000 the new legislation, mentioned above, was directed at the appeals process. Since the Laurentiu –v- The Minster of Justice, Equality, and Law Reform decision the MOJ has had a decreased amount of discretion in relation to deportations.
53
Ministerial powers of deportation may be even further
produce refugees Ireland will continue to experience
limited by the granting of appeals by the Supreme
immigration. What remains to be seen is how policy
Court (The Irish Time,s 4/4/00) Whatever the result of
makers will address immigration in the future. Up to
these appeals, Ireland continues to move toward a
this point, as the Minister of State Liz O’Donnell has
more illiberal immigration policy.
commented, the handling of the refugee and asylum
The increase in immigration continues and Ireland refuses to admit that it is here to stay. As long as the economy is growing and international problems
issue in Ireland has been a ‘shambles’ (Rafter, 4/2/00).
54
REFERENCES 2 Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso Anthias, Floya and Nira Yuval-Davis. 1994. ‘Women and the Nation-State’, in J. Hutchinson and A. D. Smith (eds.) Nationalism. 1994. Oxford University Press. Banton, Michael. 1979. ‘Analytical and folk concepts of race and ethnicity’ Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 2 no. 2 Barbesino, Paolo. 1998. ‘Observing migration: The construction of statistics in a national monitoring system’ in Koser and Lutz (eds.) The New Migration in Europe: Social Constructions Social Realities. London: MacMillan Bendikat, Elfi. 1996. ‘Qualitative historical research on municipal policies’. in L. Hantrias and S. Mangen (eds.) Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Pinter. Brubaker, Rogers. 1992. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Harvard University Press. Byrne, Anne and Madeleine Leonard (eds.). 1997. Women and Irish Society: A Sociological Reader. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Carens, Joseph. 1987 ‘Aliens and citizens: The case for open borders’, The Review of Politics vol. 49 no. 2 : 251-272 Carolan, Mary. 23/1/99. ‘Aliens Act found to be unconstitutional’. The Irish Times Castles, Steven. and Mark Miller. 1993. The Age of Migration. London: Macmillan. Central Statistics Office. 1971. Census of the Population.. Dublin: Government Stationary office. Central Statistics Office. 1981. Census of the Population.. Dublin: Government Stationary office. Central Statistics Office. 1991. Census of the Population.. Dublin: Government Stationary office. Central Statistics Office.1998. Population and Migration Estimates. Dublin: Government Stationary office Clancy, Patrick, Sheelagh Drudy, Kathleen Lynch, and Liam O’Dowd. 1986. Ireland: A Sociological Profile. Sociological Association of Ireland Coakley, Anne. 1997 ‘Gender and Citizenship: social construction of mothers in Ireland’ in A. Byrne and M. Leonard (eds.) Women and Irish Society: A Sociological Reader. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Collinson, Sara. 1993. Beyond Borders: West European Mirgration Policy. Royal Institute of International Affairs. Comerford, R. V. 1988. ‘Political myths in modern Ireland’ in C. George Sandulescu (ed.) Irishness In A Changing Society: The Princess Grace Irish Library Series. Gerrards Cross: Colin Smythe Commision on Emigration and Other Social Problems. 1956. Reports 1948-1954. Dublin: The Stationary Office. Cornelius, Wayne, Philip Martin and James Hollifield (eds.) 1994. Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Coulter, Carol. 9 /7/99. ‘Fall in numbers seeking asylum’. The Irish Times Coulter, Carol. 1/3/00a. ‘Report follows asylum-seeker’s legal journey’. The Irish Time Coulter, Carol. 1/3/00b. ‘Report on Refugee law at odds with state policy’. The Irish Times Coulter, Carol. 4/4/00. ‘New setback to Minister on Deportations’. The Irish Times Crisp, Jeff. 1999. ‘Who has counted the refugees? UNHCR and the Politics of numbers’, New Issues in Refugee Research. UNHCR Working Paper. No. 12 . UNHCR: Political Research Unit. Cullen, Paul. 1/12/98. ‘ Group concerned at level of immigration’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 12/8/97. ‘O’Donoghue intends to amend Refugee Act’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 15/4/98. ‘New measures planned to cut immigration’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 17/1/98. ‘ Number of asylum-seekers doubles’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 18/6/99. ‘Exclusion of Japanese was ‘well founded’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 25/8/98. ‘Flow of asylum-seekers now a trickle’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 27/8/97. ‘Gardai struggling to stem tide of illegal immigration’ The Irish Times
2 There are no page numbers for newspaper articles as they were sourced from the internet.
55
Cullen, Paul. 27/8/97. ‘Law change to give asylum-seekers new rights to appeal’ The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 29/8/97. ‘Gardai investigate asylum welfare frauds’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 3/11/97. ‘UN refugees body appoints its first Rep’ The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 3/9/97. ‘Illegal refugees using taxis to cross border’ The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 7/8/97. ‘UNHCR criticizes govt’ over illegal immigrants’ The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. 9/2/99. ‘Figures show numbers seeking asylum up 20%’. The Irish Times Cullen, Paul. and Elanin Keogh. 8/8/97. ‘curbs ignore harsh reality of refugee world’ The Irish Times Cusack, Jim. 18/10/97. ‘Officers accused of targeting black passengers’. in The Irish Times Dearden, Stephen. 1997. ‘Immigration Policy in the European Community’ in European Development Policy Study Group. Discussion paper no. 4 March 1997. Department of Foreign Affairs. 1998. Irish Aid. Dublin: Department of Foreign Affairs. Desorsieres, Alain. 1996. ‘Statistical Traditions: an obstacle to international comparisons?’ in L. Hantrias and S. Mangen (eds.) Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Pinter. Donohoe, Miriam. 11/2/00. ‘Plan to tighten asylum appeals process’. The Irish Times Donohoe, Miriam. 9/3/00. ‘Government considers tents for asylum applicants’. The Irish Times Donohoe, Miriam. 29/3/00. ‘Measures to tackle housing for asylum-seekers passed’. The Irish Times Donohoe, M. and Newman, C. 30/3/00. ‘Flotels opposed by civil rights groups’. The Irish Times Editorial. 16/4/98. ‘Irish Citizenship’. The Irish Times Egan, Suzanne. and Costello, Kevin. 1999. Refugee Law Comparative Study: a comparative study of Irish Legislation . Commisioned by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Dublin: Stationery Office. Eurostat. 1986. Statistical Country Summary. Statistical of the European Communities: EU Eurostat. 1991. Statistical Country Summary. Statistical of the European Communities: EU Eurostat. 1997. Statistical Country Summary. Statistical of the European Communities: EU Freeman, Gary. 1999. ‘The Quest for Skill: a comparative analysis’ in Bernstein and Weiner (eds.) Migration and Refugee Policies: An Overview. London: Pinter Gallegher, Micheal. 1995. ‘How many nations are there in Ireland?’ Ethnic and Racial Studies. Vol. 18 no. 4 October Garcia y Griego, Manuel. 1994. ‘Canada: Flexibility and Control in Immigration and Refugee Policy’ in W. Cornelius et. al., (eds.) Controlling Immigration: a global perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Glover, Judith. 1996. ‘Espistemological and Methodological considerations in secondary analysis’, in L. Hantrias and S. Mangen (eds.) Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Pinter. Goldstone, Katrina. 1999. ‘Christianity, Conversation and the tricky business of names: images of Jews in nationalist Irish Catholic discourse’ in Ronit Lentin (ed.) The Expanding Nation: Towards a MultiEthnic Ireland, Conference Papers. Dublin: Ethnic and Racial Studies, Department of Sociology, Trinity College. Goodwin-Gill, Guy, R.K. Jenny and R. Perruchoud. 1985. ‘Basic Humanitarian Prinicples applicable to nonNationals’. in International Migration Review. Vol. 19 No. 3 Fall 1985: 556-569. Haughey, Nuala. 4/1/00. ‘Almost 8,000 people sought asylum last year’. The Irish Times Haughey, Nuala. 22/3/00. ‘Asylum-seekers outside Dublin “in detention”’. The Irish Times Hammar, Tomas. (ed.) 1985. European Immigration Policy: A Comparative Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hantrias, Linda. and Steen Magen. (eds.) 1996. Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Pinter. Howard, Cyril. 1993. ‘The United Kingdom II: immigration and the law’ in D. Kubat (ed.) The politics of Migration Policies: Settlement and Integration, the First World into the 1990’s. New York: Center for Migration Studies. Humphreys, Joe. 2/3/00. ‘Asylum-seeker centres too costly to build - Minister’. The Irish Times Ignatiev, Noel. 1995. How the Irish became White . New York: Routledge.
56
Inglis, Tom. 1998. Moral Monopoly: The rise and fall of the Catholic church in modern Ireland. Dublin: University College of Dublin Press Institute of Jewish Policy Research. 1997. Antisemitism World Report. London: Institute of Jewish Affairs. Jackson, John. A. 1963. The Irish in Britain. London: Routledge Jackson, John. A. 1986. Migration. London: Routledge Kaye, Ron. 1998. ‘Redefining the Refugee: The UK Media Portrayal of Asylum-seekers’ in Koser and Lutz (eds.) The New Mirgration in Europe: Social Constructions Social Realities. London: MacMillan Kearney, Richard. 1988. ‘The transnational crisis of modern Irish Culture’ in C. George Sandulescu (ed.) Irishness In A Changing Society: The Princess Grace Irish Library Series. Gerrards Cross: Colin Smythe Ltd Kenney, Mairin. 1994. ‘Final thoughts: a case for celebration?’, in May McCann et. al., (eds.) Irish Travellers: Culture and Ethnicity. Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Keogh, Dermot. 1998. Jews in Twentieth Century Ireland: Refigees, Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. Cork; Cork University Press. Kiberd, Declan. 1995. Inventing Ireland. London: Jonathan Cape King, Jason. 1999. ‘Porous Nation: From Ireland’s ‘Haemorrhage’ to Immigrant Inundation’ in Ronit Lentin (ed.) The Expanding Nation: Towards a Multi-Ethnic Ireland, Conference Papers. Dublin: Ethnic and Racial Studies, Department of Sociology, Trinity College. Kockel, Ullrich. 1991. ‘Counter Cultural Migrants in the West of Ireland’ in Russell King (ed.) Contemporary Irish migration. Dublin: Geography Society of Ireland. Layton-Henry, Zig. 1985. ‘Great Britain’ in T. Hammar (ed.) European Immigration Policy: A Comparative Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Layton-Henry, Zig. 1994. ‘Britain: The Would-be Zero Immigration Country’ in W. Cornelius et. al. (eds.) Controlling Immigration: a global perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Lee, J.J. 1989. Ireland 1912 to 1985. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lentin, Louis and Katrina Goldstone. 1997. No More Blooms: Irish Government Policy towards Jewish Refugees, 1933-1946. Broadcast on RTE 1, 10 December 1997. Lentin, Ronit (ed.). 1999. The Expanding Nation: Towards a Multi-Ethnic Ireland, Conference Papers. Dublin: Ethnic and Racial Studies, Department of Sociology, Trinity College. Lentin, Ronit and Robbie McVeigh. (eds.) Forthcoming. Racism and Anti-Racism in Irish Society. Loomba, Ania. 1998. Colonialism/Postcolonialism. New York: Routledge Mac Greil, Micheal. 1978. Prejudice and Tolerance in Ireland: Based on a Survey of Intergroup Attitudes of Dublin Adults and Other Sources. Maynooth: Survey Research Unit, St Patrick’s College, Maynooth. MacGreil, Micheal. 1996. Prejudice in Ireland Revisited. Maynooth: Survey and Research Unit, St Patrick College, Maynooth. Malik, Kenan. 1996. The meaning of Race: race history and culture in Western Society. London: Macmillan Martin, Philip. 1994. ‘Germany: Reluctant Land of Immigration’ in W. Cornelius et. al.(eds.) Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press Martin, Philip. 1999. ‘Guest Worker Policies: an international Survey’ in Bernstein and Weiner (eds.) Migration and Refugee Policies: An Overview. London: Pinter McCann, May, Seamus O'Siochain, and Joseph Ruane (eds.) 1994. Irish Travellers: Culture and Ethnicity. Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. McVeigh, Robbie. 1996. The Racialization of Irishness: Racism and Anti-Racism in Ireland. Belfast: Centre for Research and Documentation Memmi, Albert. 1990. The Coloniser and the Colonised. London: Earthscan. Miles, Robert. 1989. Racism. London: Routledge. Miles, Robert. 1993. Racism after ‘Race Relations’. London: Routledge. Miller, Mark. 1999. ‘The Prevention of Unauthorized Migration’ in Bernstein and Weiner (eds.) Migration and Refugee Policies: An Overview. London: Pinter Miller, Mark. 1997. ‘International migration and security: towards transatlantic convergence’ in Uçarer, E. and Puchala. D. (eds.) Immigration into Western Societies: Problems and Policies. 1997. London: Pinter. Myers, Kevin. 23/3/98. ‘An Irishman’s Diary’. The Irish Times
57
Nandy, Asis.1983. Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Ní Shuinear, Sinead. 1994. ‘Irish Travellers, ethnitity and the origins question’ in M. McCann et. al. (eds.) Irish Travellers: Culture and Ethnicity. Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Níc Chinneíde, Dariena. 1999. Treo? Changing Irish Identity. Episode 1. April-May 1999. Broadcast on RTE 1. 20/4/99 O’Brien, Brenda. 1992. Peripheral Preference: German Families and Industrial location in South-West Ireland. Unpublished MA Thesis. Trinity College Dublin. O’Toole, Fintan. 1998. The Lie of The Land: Irish Identities. Dublin: New Island Books Opinion. 1/17/98. ‘Dealing with immigration’. The Irish Times Opinion. 21/10/97. ‘Immigrants do not have to be seen as a problem’. The Irish Times Opinion. 3/12/97. ‘Ireland of the welcomes’ The Irish Times Øyen, Else.(ed.) 1990. Comparative Methodology: Theory and Practice in International Social Research Pieterse, Jan Nedervee. 1997. Deconstruction/reconstructing ethnicity. Nations and Nationalism, vol. 3 no.3: 365-396 Pollack, Andy. 1/2/99. ‘Majority of asylum-seekers abused- survey’. The Irish Times Pollack, Andy. 23/3/99. ‘Nearly 90% of asylum-seekers currently refused’. The Irish Times Pollack, Andy. 27/4/99. ‘80% if refugees have 3rd level education’. The Irish Times Pollack, Andy. 3/6/99. ‘Asylum-seekers gaining refugee status is raising’. The Irish Times Pratt, Anna. 1999. ‘Dunking the Doughnut: Discretionary power, law and the administration of the Canadian Immigration Act’ in Social & Legal Studies. Vol. 8 no. 2: p. 199-226 Punch, Aidan. and Catherine Fineran. 1999. ‘The Demographic and Socio-Economic Characteristic of Migrants: 1986-1996’ in Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland. Vol. XXVIII, part I. 1998/1999 Rafter, Kevin. 4/1/00. ‘Majority want limits on refugee numbers’. The Irish Times Rafter, Kevin. 29/4/00. ‘Immigration Policy to focus on three key sectors’. The Irish Times Rafter, Kevin and Nuala Haughey. 14/1/00. ‘Most granted refugee status had to appeal’. The Irish Times Ragin, Charles. 1987. The Comparative Method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Rasmussen, Hans. 1996. No Entry: Immigration Policy in Europe. Copenhagen: Business School Press. Refugee Agency. 1998. Report of a Survey of the Vietnamese and Bosnian Refugee Communities in Ireland. Dublin: Refugee Agency. Resnick, David. 1987. ‘John Locke and the problem of Naturalization’ in The Review of Politics. Vol. 49 No. 3. Summer 1987 Rex, John. 1983. Race Relations in Sociological Theory. London: Routledge Sandulescu, C. George. 1988. Irishness In A Changing Society: The Princess Grace Irish Library Series. Gerrards Cross: Colin Smythe Ltd. Schrag, Peter. 1972. The Vanishing American: The Decline and Fall of the White Anglo Saxon Protestant. London: Victor gallancz LTD Smelser, Neil. 1976. Compartive Methods in the Social Sciences. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Sowell, Thomas. 1998. Conquests and Cultures: An International History. New York: Basic Spencer, Ian. 1997. British Immigration Policy Since 1939: The making of multi-racial Britain. London: Routledge. Spicker, Paul. 1996. ‘Normative Comparisons of social security systems’. in L. Hantrias and S. Mangen (eds.) Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Pinter. Staff Writer. 5/1/99. ‘Little support for ‘open-door’ refugee policy’. The Irish Times Staff Writer. 27/5/99. ‘Labour condemns procedures used to deport asylum-seekers’. The Irish Times Staff Writer. 16/6/99. ‘Consul protests at treatment of Poles’. The Irish Times Staff Writer. 4/3/00. ‘FF rules out open door refugee policy’. The Irish Times Staff Writer. 15/3/00. ‘Refugee detentions put Ireland out of step’. in The Irish Times Suarez-Orozco, Marcelo. 1994 ‘Anxious neighbours: Belgium and its immigrant minorities’ in W. Cornelius et. al., (eds.) Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective. Stanford : Stanford University Press.
58
Suhrke, Astri and Aristide Zolberg. 1999. ‘Issues in contemporary refugee policies’, in Bernstein and Weiner (eds.) Migration and Refugee Policies: An Overview. London: Pinter Tovey, Hilary. 1998. ‘The State and the Irish Language: The role of Bord na Gaeilge’ International Journal of the Sociology of Language Vol. 70: 53-68 Tynan, Maol Muire. 26/6/97. ‘Immigration to be vetted at entry points from Britain’ The Irish Times Ungerson, Clare. 1996. ‘Qualitative methods’, in L. Hantrias and S. Mangen (eds.) Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Pinter. Vedsted-Hansen, Jens. 1999. New Issues in Refugee Research. UNHCR Working Paper. No.6. UNHCR: Political Research Unit. Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice: a defence of Pluralism and Equality. Oxford: Blackwell. Ward, Eilis. 1996. ‘A Big show-off to show what we could do’ –Ireland and the Hungarian refugee crisis of 1956’, Irish Studies in International Affairs. Vol. 7. 1996. Ward, Eilis. 1999. ‘Ireland and Refugees/Asylum-seeker: 1922-1966’, in Ronit Lentin (ed.) The Expanding Nation: Towards a Multi-Ethnic Ireland, Conference Papers. Dublin: Ethnic and Racial Studies, Department of Sociology, Trinity College. Weiner, Myron. 1999. ‘Migration and refugee policies: an overview’, in Bernstein, A. and Weiner, M. (eds.) Migration and Refugee Policies: An Overview. London: Pinter Yuval-Davis, Nira. 1997. Gender and Nation. London: Sage.